On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 18:20:14 -0500, "Shirley" <bigd1999@bellsoutj.net> wrote: >What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? a spank is declared by a clear winner in a flame war/thread. flaming is also equal to homosexuality, and therefore a spank might mean they are into homosexual B&D (bondage & domination). HTH HAND etc... -- dave hillstrom mhm15x4 zrbj this signature might or might not be for mimus. but it is for hatchetmama and shirley and smee. and LaBlueGirl and Dr. Flonkenstein. farewell for the time being, frankb. may you learn more mysteries on the other side than one can count on this plane.
Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: >What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else generally does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it would rile them up). All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled.
Don't fight it, Wavy G...Just lie down and try to relax: >Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: > >>What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? > >A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a >procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" >generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the >newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost >exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else generally >does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or >rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it >would rile them up). > >All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. *Ahem*: "to BE trolled." My apologies for this error on my part. Please adjust your logs or journals accordingly.
On Nov 16, 6:54 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: > Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: > > >What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? > > A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a > procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" > generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the > newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost > exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else generally > does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or > rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it > would rile them up). > > All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. you'll crazy lol
Don't fight it, cutie...Just lie down and try to relax: >On Nov 16, 6:54 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >> Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: >> >> >What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? >> >> A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a >> procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" >> generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the >> newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost >> exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else generally >> does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or >> rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it >> would rile them up). >> >> All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. > >you'll crazy lol I'll crazy? Huh? Oh. OHHHH. Ok, I get the joke. I forgot the verb. I admitted it, already. Can you stop hounding me about it?
Wavy G wrote: > Don't fight it, cutie...Just lie down and try to relax: > >>On Nov 16, 6:54 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >> >>>Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: >>> >>>>What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? >>> >>>A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a >>>procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" >>>generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the >>>newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost >>>exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else generally >>>does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or >>>rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it >>>would rile them up). >>> >>>All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. >> >>you'll crazy lol > > I'll crazy? Huh? Oh. OHHHH. Ok, I get the joke. I forgot the verb. > I admitted it, already. Can you stop hounding me about it? This seems to a poor way to start a flame war. -- nuts
Don't fight it, mixed nuts...Just lie down and try to relax: >Wavy G wrote: >> Don't fight it, cutie...Just lie down and try to relax: >> >>>On Nov 16, 6:54 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >>> >>>>Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: >>>> >>>>>What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? >>>> >>>>A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a >>>>procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" >>>>generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the >>>>newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost >>>>exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else generally >>>>does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or >>>>rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it >>>>would rile them up). >>>> >>>>All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. >>> >>>you'll crazy lol >> >> I'll crazy? Huh? Oh. OHHHH. Ok, I get the joke. I forgot the verb. >> I admitted it, already. Can you stop hounding me about it? > >This seems to a poor way to start a flame war. I know. It's so hackneyed, they should come up with a term for it. I know: "grammar lame."
On Nov 17, 12:33 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: > Don't fight it, cutie...Just lie down and try to relax: > > > > > > >On Nov 16, 6:54 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: > >> Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: > > >> >What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? > > >> A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a > >> procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" > >> generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the > >> newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost > >> exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else generally > >> does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or > >> rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it > >> would rile them up). > > >> All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. > > >you'll crazy lol > > I'll crazy? Huh? Oh. OHHHH. Ok, I get the joke. I forgot the verb. > I admitted it, already. Can you stop hounding me about it?- Hide quoted text - > I will crazy? please explain
Don't fight it, headkase...Just lie down and try to relax: >On Nov 17, 12:33 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >> Don't fight it, cutie...Just lie down and try to relax: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Nov 16, 6:54 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >> >> Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: >> >> >> >What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? >> >> >> A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a >> >> procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" >> >> generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the >> >> newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost >> >> exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else generally >> >> does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or >> >> rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it >> >> would rile them up). >> >> >> All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. >> >> >you'll crazy lol >> >> I'll crazy? Huh? Oh. OHHHH. Ok, I get the joke. I forgot the verb. >> I admitted it, already. Can you stop hounding me about it?- Hide quoted text - >> > >I will crazy? > >please explain Okay, since "cutie" seems to be missing in action (hmm...poetry groups...how did she get *here*?...hmm...), I will have to explain her hilarious rejoinder for her. In my response to Shirley's post, I made a typing error in my closing remarks. The last sentence should have read like this: "All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to be trolled." In my haste, I completely missed typing the "be," and it ended up looking like this: "All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled." "'Deserve ***to*** trolled'? That doesn't make sense," cutie said to herself. "Oh, it's a grammatical error," she continued, "made on behalf of that famous Usenet mogul Wavy G. I'm going to *FLAME* this guy with a *GRAMMAR LAME* and paint his wagon!!! I WILL BE A HERO TO ALL THE NEWSGROUPS!!!" So then cutie--being a poetry group resident and obviously no stranger to dramatic irony--retorted with this zinger: "you'll crazy lol." "YOU'LL CRAZY"? I said to myself. "'YOU *WILL* CRAZY'??? HUH??? I don't get--OH. OHHHH. I *DO* GET IT. She zinged me with a poorly constructed sentence as a mock-up of the humourous faux-pas in my antecedent post. The entire newsgroup shared a laugh at my expense, and then mysteriously, cutie disappeared from the newsgroup as quickly as she arrived. I am glad to have cleared things up.
"Wavy G" <imprecious@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote in message news:0da6k31eo8cncbn2vsdm6svcqm7ghek9k4@4ax.com... > Don't fight it, headkase...Just lie down and try to relax: > >>On Nov 17, 12:33 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >>> Don't fight it, cutie...Just lie down and try to relax: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >On Nov 16, 6:54 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >>> >> Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: >>> >>> >> >What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? >>> >>> >> A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a >>> >> procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" >>> >> generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the >>> >> newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost >>> >> exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else >>> >> generally >>> >> does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or >>> >> rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it >>> >> would rile them up). >>> >>> >> All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. >>> >>> >you'll crazy lol >>> >>> I'll crazy? Huh? Oh. OHHHH. Ok, I get the joke. I forgot the verb. >>> I admitted it, already. Can you stop hounding me about it?- Hide quoted >>> text - >>> >> >>I will crazy? >> >>please explain > > Okay, since "cutie" seems to be missing in action (hmm...poetry > groups...how did she get *here*?...hmm...), I will have to explain her > hilarious rejoinder for her. > > In my response to Shirley's post, I made a typing error in my closing > remarks. The last sentence should have read like this: > > "All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to be trolled." > > In my haste, I completely missed typing the "be," and it ended up > looking like this: > > "All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled." > > "'Deserve ***to*** trolled'? That doesn't make sense," cutie said to > herself. "Oh, it's a grammatical error," she continued, "made on behalf > of that famous Usenet mogul Wavy G. I'm going to *FLAME* this guy with > a *GRAMMAR LAME* and paint his wagon!!! I WILL BE A HERO TO ALL THE > NEWSGROUPS!!!" > > So then cutie--being a poetry group resident and obviously no stranger > to dramatic irony--retorted with this zinger: > > "you'll crazy lol." > > "YOU'LL CRAZY"? I said to myself. "'YOU *WILL* CRAZY'??? HUH??? I > don't get--OH. OHHHH. I *DO* GET IT. She zinged me with a poorly > constructed sentence as a mock-up of the humourous faux-pas in my > antecedent post. > > The entire newsgroup shared a laugh at my expense, and then > mysteriously, cutie disappeared from the newsgroup as quickly as she > arrived. > > I am glad to have cleared things up. I thought the whole thing amusing and laughed heartily... Thank you Wavy G.
Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: > >"Wavy G" <imprecious@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote in message >news:0da6k31eo8cncbn2vsdm6svcqm7ghek9k4@4ax.com... >> Don't fight it, headkase...Just lie down and try to relax: >> >>>On Nov 17, 12:33 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >>>> Don't fight it, cutie...Just lie down and try to relax: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >On Nov 16, 6:54 pm, Wavy G <impreci...@dontyouthink.co.zw> wrote: >>>> >> Don't fight it, Shirley...Just lie down and try to relax: >>>> >>>> >> >What is the difference between *flaming* and *spanking*?? >>>> >>>> >> A "flame" is an insult directed at another poster. A "spank" is a >>>> >> procamation of victory over another poster following a "flame-war" >>>> >> generally delivered when (it is assumed) the loser has left the >>>> >> newsgroup, or Usenet altogether. Both of these terms are almost >>>> >> exclusively misused. Somewon claiming "SPANK" on somewon else >>>> >> generally >>>> >> does so with no rightful reason, just because they "flamed" them (or >>>> >> rather, said something stupid and irrelevent about them, thinking it >>>> >> would rile them up). >>>> >>>> >> All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled. >>>> >>>> >you'll crazy lol >>>> >>>> I'll crazy? Huh? Oh. OHHHH. Ok, I get the joke. I forgot the verb. >>>> I admitted it, already. Can you stop hounding me about it?- Hide quoted >>>> text - >>>> >>> >>>I will crazy? >>> >>>please explain >> >> Okay, since "cutie" seems to be missing in action (hmm...poetry >> groups...how did she get *here*?...hmm...), I will have to explain her >> hilarious rejoinder for her. >> >> In my response to Shirley's post, I made a typing error in my closing >> remarks. The last sentence should have read like this: >> >> "All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to be trolled." >> >> In my haste, I completely missed typing the "be," and it ended up >> looking like this: >> >> "All the more reason why these Usenet types deserve to trolled." >> >> "'Deserve ***to*** trolled'? That doesn't make sense," cutie said to >> herself. "Oh, it's a grammatical error," she continued, "made on behalf >> of that famous Usenet mogul Wavy G. I'm going to *FLAME* this guy with >> a *GRAMMAR LAME* and paint his wagon!!! I WILL BE A HERO TO ALL THE >> NEWSGROUPS!!!" >> >> So then cutie--being a poetry group resident and obviously no stranger >> to dramatic irony--retorted with this zinger: >> >> "you'll crazy lol." >> >> "YOU'LL CRAZY"? I said to myself. "'YOU *WILL* CRAZY'??? HUH??? I >> don't get--OH. OHHHH. I *DO* GET IT. She zinged me with a poorly >> constructed sentence as a mock-up of the humourous faux-pas in my >> antecedent post. >> >> The entire newsgroup shared a laugh at my expense, and then >> mysteriously, cutie disappeared from the newsgroup as quickly as she >> arrived. >> >> I am glad to have cleared things up. > >I thought the whole thing amusing and laughed heartily... > >Thank you Wavy G. Friends of mine in the vicinity slapped me on the back as they chuckled and offered me words of jocular congratulation.
