Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
AmyDaly
Of course the details are irrelevant when they don't prove your made up stories. Again, you just make stuff up with no proof or details. Here let me try it.
The overall allegation was that Bob's and Grooby have a tight-knit history and that Steven has the influence to blackball me from Bob's. You've admitted that he does in other threads when you've told me that I essentially should have shut my mouth to get more work. Yes, I was told by someone else (two others actually) that he still has an ownership stake, and that may not be the case anymore as of fairly recently, but regardless, one would think the owner of Grooby would have the ability to blackball people on a lot of sites, especially those with which his company has had a relationship, if he so desired. Why just today he was bragging about the business he does with SMC, and we know about his connection to Bob, so you're arguing semantics now. :geek:
As I said: fin.
~BB~
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
seanchai
. He then decided to go solo and bought me out with a VERY nice automobilet.
Pics or it didn't happen.
And don't post some shot of a tuner's '94 Civic either!
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BellaBellucci
I alleged that Steven has the influence to blackball me from Bob's. It's been shown that he does. You're arguing semantics now. :geek:
As I said: fin.
~BB~
So you made some allegations, and claim that "It's been shown that he does". Can you point me to where? Where is the information that you speak of for all of us to see? And pointing out the fact that he was part of grooby over 10 years ago isn't the best of evidence that Steven has pull as to who bob shoots.
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BellaBellucci
Yes, I was told that he still has an ownership stake, but you're arguing semantics now. :geek:
It's not semantics Bella. You clearly stated something as fact, which wasn't - and then tried to hook me on it. You were clearly mis-informed or just downright lied.
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
seanchai
It's not semantics Bella. You clearly stated something as fact, which wasn't - and then tried to hook me on it. You were clearly mis-informed or just downright lied.
So it's your argument that having one detail in question invalidates the entire argument? Yeah, I'm going to have check my debate rule book on that one.
Nope. It's not there.
Fin with you too. You're getting too ridiculous for my liking. :lol:
Vote Silly Party!
Election Night Special - YouTube
~BB~
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MdR Dave
Pics or it didn't happen.
And don't post some shot of a tuner's '94 Civic either!
:-) bit older than 1994 but I'd rather not say as it would put a price on it.
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BellaBellucci
So it's your argument that having one detail in question invalidates the entire argument? Yeah, I'm going to have check my debate rule book on that one.
You have no proof at all. You completely made the whole thing up. I am not only calling out one detail. I am saying your whole story is BS and you have 0 evidence to show me that I am wrong.
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BellaBellucci
So it's your argument that having one detail in question invalidates the entire argument? Yeah, I'm going to have check my debate rule book on that one.
Nope. It's not there.
Fin with you too. You're getting too ridiculous for my liking. :lol:
Bella you stated:
"Bob won't touch me because you're all up in his business (literally, still being a partner in BTG - or did you think I wouldn't find out?)"
That's not one little fact - that's a whole assertation that was downright wrong/lie. Yes it invalidates it, of course it does. You lied or made a mistake, either way I think your mortal kombat WIN was a little embarressing. What an utter failure you are with everything.
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
lol this thread is a hoot too
HA has been very entertaining today at least
Re: WoodNutSac "All TS's are Men in it for Attention"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
seanchai
Bella you stated:
"Bob won't touch me because you're all up in his business (literally, still being a partner in BTG - or did you think I wouldn't find out?)"
That's not one little fact - that's a whole assertation that was downright wrong/lie. Yes it invalidates it, of course it does. You lied or made a mistake, either way I think your mortal kombat WIN was a little embarressing. What an utter failure you are with everything.
Again, hyperbole or not, whether I was misinformed or not, I still stand by the general principal that you have the influence to blackball people. I'm pretty sure you've admitted it before although I'm having a hard time finding the quote (we argue a LOT! :lol:), but I guess it wouldn't matter anyway since, like in this thread, you could always just claim that you were joking, which, by the way, is a cop-out in a serious debate, but a tactic that both you and Buddy employ liberally.
Regardless of details (yes, details), there's plenty of evidence of your power and I think that you'd have a tough time convincing people that you don't have the influence to do a simple thing like blackball someone.
So maybe it wasn't a flawless victory after all, but all I have to do in this game to win is survive. I'm going to continue doing that despite whatever you can throw at me. It's just what I do. :geek:
~BB~
