Comments on: FanMAIL: Are SR Cliques Scaring Newbies Away?

By: ggouch

ggouch — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:41:16 +0000

I have been a member for awhile. I wish I had the time I had back then to hang out more and voice my opion.

BUT: I am cracking up!!! But I didn’t see this one coming at all….did this really provoke over 200 responses?

The COMMENT Section is the best part of the posts. Sometimes you can just tell by the heading just how HOT this section is going to be.

There are certain people that have such a way with words that you can’t wait to steal…I mean read their creative one-linners or pledgerize…I mean take in their clever little metaphors.

Blogs are where the MANY opinions are nutured, cultivated, emulated and when necessary ripped up from their roots.

WOW to the newbies Didn’t you type in WWW. before the Sandrarose.com? WWW= WORLD WIDE WEB. This is a BLOG of MANY.
and an even bigger WOW to SR for giving it the attention: With all respect…you are taking this way to serious.

Sometimes it gets a little heated, but so what. How do you take something personal from made up screen names and avatars of a “Crying Baby”, “Children Pics”, “Cartoon Characters”, “Folks repping the CELEBS and my favorite:”What ever the hell that AVATAR is Charles posted”….LOL

BTW: TEAM CHARLES!! TEAM CHARLES!! all the way!!!! REALLY??? Who on here don’t know that like some of SR Posts, Charles’ comments are simply put out to provoke CONTROVERSY in the name of entertainment.

What did he say that got him banned anyway? He was’nt even tried by a jury of his posting peers!!!!! What about the E-CONSTITUTION!

Bring him back SR. You of all people should appreciate his ability to provoke thought.

By: wiggy2272003

wiggy2272003 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:14:44 +0000

Well thats what I thought I meant I didn’t see any personal attacks in the email Charles had a valid point, that about the atl people someone always posts that they know them they always new and seem to never post again(according to Charles I hadn’t noticed) it wasn’t a personal attack. Thats why I said why didn’t she just address the offender. Anyway you don’t have to answer we just saw it differently.

By: KayCeiSoul

KayCeiSoul — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:34:32 +0000

You sneakin’? LOL!! You need a privacy screen or you betta’ exercize those fingers on the alt+tab keys!

Anyhoo - Absolutely! If the battle is yours by all means have at it (respectfully), but some folks are just better left alone. (rofl) Doesn’t bother me, and Charles never came for me. Never gave him a reason to. Even if he had I wouldn’t have gone there with him in the same way he came for me, I would have brought it on in, you feel me?

Now if ANYONE addresses my children then it’s anybody’s game because that is a personal attack. I don’t personally attack anyone Wiggy, not in real life or on the web UNLESS me or mine are personally attacked. That’s the offense in it.

By: wiggy2272003

wiggy2272003 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:27:01 +0000

KayC, I see your point, trying to type undercover leads to mistakes. When I just reread my post I see I missed some words and whatnot here and there so it might be confusing.
Outline
I meant guise as in the form or shape of.
Isn’t it mature and responsible to address a problem you have with the offender first? Like I said maybe they don’t even realize their words impact.
You said you held your own when someone addressed you and your children? Why not hold your own with Charles?

By: KayCeiSoul

KayCeiSoul — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:07:04 +0000

And when you use guise in the tense that you used it in, it does meean this:

guise: a purpose or motive alleged or an appearance assumed in order to cloak the real intention or state of affairs.

Even in different ways it means to cloak, costume, clothe, cover, etc. etc. etc.

It’s ok though - all is well.