Disabusing Dullard's Disingenuously Distasteful Discourse



E

Edward Dolan

Guest
"LoGo USA" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Hey guys-
>
> This is a long post, pretty much just what will probably
> my last posting this year - the end product of notes I've
> popped off - berating the misguided miscreant who still
> stubbornly continues to litter the ARBR archives with
> mean-spirited self-indulgent drivel posted in the names
> of Ed Dolan and nget. Don't waste your time reading any
> further unless you enjoy the humiliation of this sad
> (but very deserving) simpleton. Anyway, here we go again:
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> AWWW-WWW... both sides of the Dolan-nget duality (aka
> DO-NG) are unhappy. While his virtual stepchild nged
> (nget with a dash of Dolan) poor-mouths:
>
>>I am the underdog, in that there should be no doubt.

>
> we also get a complaint from the primary ego (aka Edgy -
> I picture him as a squat, sour-faced, toadish old
> curmudgeon, with wrinkled pouty lips, cold fish eyes
> and a dull, quacking voice - sort of like an aging
> Edward G. Robinson playing one of his worst bad boys):
>
>>... calling him [Wayne] the Poet of ****. I wish I had
>>thought of that! ... [nged's] remark... was on the
>>order of genius...

>
> Now that is unfair! Gnoisy gnuisance nged ngets to pretend
> that he has a job, sex with an imaginary wife (at least
> presumably occasionally), that he has not one but two
> (make-believe) trikes much nicer than Edgy's real (or
> imaginary?) ones, and maybe even live in a milder climate.
> So why does the self-professed underdog get to 'think up'
> that absolutely brilliant bon mot [YAWW-WW-WN] which has
> been repeated approximately sixty-seven times to date by
> the dyslexic duo? One wonders just how lacking in both
> intellect and talent we are supposed to think the Edgy
> persona is. He says:


All of the above thus far is unintelligible. Wayne can't write prose. Maybe
that is why he writes verse. I could teach him how to write prose, but why
should I. I think he is happy in his ignorance, and I must confess, I am not
very happy in my wisdom.

>>I am never that inspired although I try to be as equally
>>as truthful [awkward, meaningless phrasing sic] in my own
>>inimitable manner.


Inimitable meads inimitable. Who would ever want to emulate your rambling
pathetic style, whether in prose or verse?
[...]

>>... since the only purpose of sex is procreation, anyone
>>who is doing anything in that [soccer?] field without
>>that goal in mind is clearly demented and depraved...

>
> Or he barfs up misworded, muddled messes like this:
>
>>I could have said ... [misused ellipsis sic] "Why use
>>a word that no one will know its meaning" [awkward
>>wording - second attempt - sic], but it does not play
>>like how [awkward wording again sic] I wanted it to
>>play.


Inimitable meads inimitable. Who would ever want to emulate your rambling
pathetic style, whether in prose or verse?

How the hell do you misuse an ellipsis?

> Is it DO-NG's real writer or only the poor Edgy persona
> that does not realize he could meet minimal standards
> for middle school composition by simply saying "Why use
> a word that no one will understand?"


Inimitable meads inimitable. Who would ever want to emulate your rambling
pathetic style, whether in prose or verse?

> But on it goes:
>
>>I have my style... Communication is of the essence...
>>Repetition is of the essense [sic]... Mr. Dolan is a
>>highly educated person who knows how to use language
>>[BLAH, BLAH, BLAH ad nauseum, ab ovo, ad nauseum, ad
>>infinitum...]

>
> Style? Sad. Communication? No. Repetition? Si, si, si.
> Proper use of first person pronoun when referring to
> oneself? No. Language know-how? Oh, please! Has 'highly
> educated' been redefined to mean 'went to class most
> days and got a mercy C- in seventh grade English while
> striving not to drool all over the swelling bosoms of
> one's pubescent female classmates'?


Wayne is descrbing himself of course. How else would he know about any of
this?

> Herewith, a FREE and much-needed tutorial in creative
> writing - Edgy wrote [all sic, sic, sic]:
>
>>Does anyone but me get the feeling that [NAME WITHHELD
>>BY SPECIAL REQUEST] is constantly resorting to freakish
>>words to impress others by his vocabulary. Unfortunately
>>for him, it is having just the opposite effect. It is
>>something that is done by the half educated who think
>>they have to use big and/or odd words to convince others
>>that they are not really as dumb as they know themselves
>>to be.

>
> While any fairly bright twelve-year-old might write:
>
> Does anyone else feel that Edgy uses freakish words in an
> effort to impress others with [not by] his vocabulary?
> Unfortunately for him, this habit [not it] has the
> opposite effect. Using odd words [again not it] is a
> common practice for a poorly educated writer, as he tries
> to convince readers that he [correcting Edgy's pronoun-
> antecedent error] is really not as dumb as he himself
> knows he is. Edgy should not even profess to understand
> what a modestly educated person has written, much less
> attempt to criticize or emulate it.


Your version is garbage and is as usual unitelligible. There has got to be
something wrong with the way your brain works. Too many drugs maybe?

> But it gets worse:
>
>>By all means go to his [Wayne's] blog, ever the province
>>of scum bags [sic], scoundrels and knaves.

>
> I think a single mouse click will work for most folks; it
> probably isn't necessary to use 'all means'. My link is to
> a simple webpage, not a blog. 'Ever' is a bit overreaching
> for something that's been in existence less than a week in
> the case of my webpage, or only about five years for blogs.
> Isn't 'the province' up in Canada? 'Scumbags' is a compound
> (not com pound) word; 'scoundrels' and 'knaves' are sadly
> pretentious, archaic words. Has this DO-NG guy (who writes
> the scripts for Edgy and nged) had an actual face-to-face
> conversation with a real person anytime in the last twenty
> years or so?


I would never go to a link of yours because I do not trust you.

All blogs have gotten a very bad reputation here on ARBR because of the
criminal vandal troll, or don't you bother with anything else that is going
on here. Wayne is so stupid as not to realize there are many ways of saying
things, all equally correct. What a dunce! My original criticism of him
stands. He is only half educated and doomed to remain that way forevermore.

> More squeaks from the shadow:


Either write in verse or prose. Your half-way measures are off putting to
say the least. Also, try to strive for some consistency of style in your
writing. This present message of yours is a hodgepodge of styles. It makes
one wonder if you even went to college and if so what kind of college. It is
amazing how your verse can make you come across as sounding more educated
than you are whereas your prose exposes you for what you are. Just barely
made it through high school - right?

>>You [Wayne] at this time are the biggest name caller ever
>>to post here.

>
> Wait, I'm confused - is that only 'at this time' or
> 'ever'? And from whom did nged copy his habit of sloppy
> overstatement? 'Ever' is an oddly familiar word, and it
> is such a long, long time. Exactly what parameter(s)
> would we measure to verify nged's 'biggest' claim?
>
> While I can certainly manage to avoid responding to the
> DO-NG twins' thoughtless, pointless, endless repetitions
> of 'Poet of ****' for weeks, it is true that I'm likely
> to coin an interesting (and most often true even though
> unkind) remark or two about a mindless non-entity (aka
> puppet or self-parodying persona) or two from time to
> time here at ARBR.
>
> But when it comes to shotgunning baseless insults (aka
> lies!), to borrow a phrase, "I am the underdog, in that
> there should be no doubt." Since Edgy has historically
> (errantly) referred to the hundreds (maybe thousands) of
> ARBR readers, using about six vile misnomers per post
> (e.g., morons, idiots, cowards) roughly twice a week for
> many months now, he'd be pretty tough to top.


Anyone who has ever been called a name by me should be honored. It is truly
deserved and should be an occasion for the miscreant to correct his
abominable behavior.

>>Nothing up my sleeve

>
> Gnot big gnews, ngolem - gno sleeve, gno arm, gnot a
> real person...

[...]

YAWN! Very tiresome. Wayne is writing for himself of course. Can there be
any doubt? He should try not to be so self absorbed.

Wayne Logo (Leggett), the Poet of ARBR, is not at least making any more
references to **** and cum, so I believe some progress is being made. It is
no good have a facility with words if you have no taste and your mind is
constantly in the gutter.

His post is way too long and only I am bothering to read it I am sure. Wayne
needs to work on being more to the point and not wandering about in a daze
so much. If he listens to me, he will improve his communication with this
group. If he doesn't listen to me, he will end up just writing to and for
himself (a form of onanism). I should really be charging him for my
services.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota
 
E

Edward Dolan

Guest
"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

Here it is again with the corrections. My spell check has apparently gone
berserk.

> "LoGo USA" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Hey guys-
>>
>> This is a long post, pretty much just what will probably
>> my last posting this year - the end product of notes I've
>> popped off - berating the misguided miscreant who still
>> stubbornly continues to litter the ARBR archives with
>> mean-spirited self-indulgent drivel posted in the names
>> of Ed Dolan and nget. Don't waste your time reading any
>> further unless you enjoy the humiliation of this sad
>> (but very deserving) simpleton. Anyway, here we go again:
>>
>> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>>
>> AWWW-WWW... both sides of the Dolan-nget duality (aka
>> DO-NG) are unhappy. While his virtual stepchild nged
>> (nget with a dash of Dolan) poor-mouths:
>>
>>>I am the underdog, in that there should be no doubt.

>>
>> we also get a complaint from the primary ego (aka Edgy -
>> I picture him as a squat, sour-faced, toadish old
>> curmudgeon, with wrinkled pouty lips, cold fish eyes
>> and a dull, quacking voice - sort of like an aging
>> Edward G. Robinson playing one of his worst bad boys):
>>
>>>... calling him [Wayne] the Poet of ****. I wish I had
>>>thought of that! ... [nged's] remark... was on the
>>>order of genius...

>>
>> Now that is unfair! Gnoisy gnuisance nged ngets to pretend
>> that he has a job, sex with an imaginary wife (at least
>> presumably occasionally), that he has not one but two
>> (make-believe) trikes much nicer than Edgy's real (or
>> imaginary?) ones, and maybe even live in a milder climate.
>> So why does the self-professed underdog get to 'think up'
>> that absolutely brilliant bon mot [YAWW-WW-WN] which has
>> been repeated approximately sixty-seven times to date by
>> the dyslexic duo? One wonders just how lacking in both
>> intellect and talent we are supposed to think the Edgy
>> persona is. He says:

>
> All of the above thus far is unintelligible. Wayne can't write prose.
> Maybe that is why he writes verse. I could teach him how to write prose,
> but why should I. I think he is happy in his ignorance, and I must
> confess, I am not very happy in my wisdom.
>
>>>I am never that inspired although I try to be as equally
>>>as truthful [awkward, meaningless phrasing sic] in my own
>>>inimitable manner.

>
> Inimitable means inimitable. Who would ever want to emulate your rambling
> pathetic style, whether in prose or verse?
> [...]
>
>>>... since the only purpose of sex is procreation, anyone
>>>who is doing anything in that [soccer?] field without
>>>that goal in mind is clearly demented and depraved...

>>
>> Or he barfs up misworded, muddled messes like this:
>>
>>>I could have said ... [misused ellipsis sic] "Why use
>>>a word that no one will know its meaning" [awkward
>>>wording - second attempt - sic], but it does not play
>>>like how [awkward wording again sic] I wanted it to
>>>play.

>
> Inimitable means inimitable. Who would ever want to emulate your rambling
> pathetic style, whether in prose or verse?
>
> How the hell do you misuse an ellipsis?
>
>> Is it DO-NG's real writer or only the poor Edgy persona
>> that does not realize he could meet minimal standards
>> for middle school composition by simply saying "Why use
>> a word that no one will understand?"

>
> Inimitable means inimitable. Who would ever want to emulate your rambling
> pathetic style, whether in prose or verse?
>
>> But on it goes:
>>
>>>I have my style... Communication is of the essence...
>>>Repetition is of the essense [sic]... Mr. Dolan is a
>>>highly educated person who knows how to use language
>>>[BLAH, BLAH, BLAH ad nauseum, ab ovo, ad nauseum, ad
>>>infinitum...]

>>
>> Style? Sad. Communication? No. Repetition? Si, si, si.
>> Proper use of first person pronoun when referring to
>> oneself? No. Language know-how? Oh, please! Has 'highly
>> educated' been redefined to mean 'went to class most
>> days and got a mercy C- in seventh grade English while
>> striving not to drool all over the swelling bosoms of
>> one's pubescent female classmates'?

>
> Wayne is descrbing himself of course. How else would he know about any of
> this?
>
>> Herewith, a FREE and much-needed tutorial in creative
>> writing - Edgy wrote [all sic, sic, sic]:
>>
>>>Does anyone but me get the feeling that [NAME WITHHELD
>>>BY SPECIAL REQUEST] is constantly resorting to freakish
>>>words to impress others by his vocabulary. Unfortunately
>>>for him, it is having just the opposite effect. It is
>>>something that is done by the half educated who think
>>>they have to use big and/or odd words to convince others
>>>that they are not really as dumb as they know themselves
>>>to be.

>>
>> While any fairly bright twelve-year-old might write:
>>
>> Does anyone else feel that Edgy uses freakish words in an
>> effort to impress others with [not by] his vocabulary?
>> Unfortunately for him, this habit [not it] has the
>> opposite effect. Using odd words [again not it] is a
>> common practice for a poorly educated writer, as he tries
>> to convince readers that he [correcting Edgy's pronoun-
>> antecedent error] is really not as dumb as he himself
>> knows he is. Edgy should not even profess to understand
>> what a modestly educated person has written, much less
>> attempt to criticize or emulate it.

>
> Your version is garbage and is as usual unitelligible. There has got to be
> something wrong with the way your brain works. Too many drugs maybe?
>
>> But it gets worse:
>>
>>>By all means go to his [Wayne's] blog, ever the province
>>>of scum bags [sic], scoundrels and knaves.

>>
>> I think a single mouse click will work for most folks; it
>> probably isn't necessary to use 'all means'. My link is to
>> a simple webpage, not a blog. 'Ever' is a bit overreaching
>> for something that's been in existence less than a week in
>> the case of my webpage, or only about five years for blogs.
>> Isn't 'the province' up in Canada? 'Scumbags' is a compound
>> (not com pound) word; 'scoundrels' and 'knaves' are sadly
>> pretentious, archaic words. Has this DO-NG guy (who writes
>> the scripts for Edgy and nged) had an actual face-to-face
>> conversation with a real person anytime in the last twenty
>> years or so?

>
> I would never go to a link of yours because I do not trust you.
>
> All blogs have gotten a very bad reputation here on ARBR because of the
> criminal vandal troll, or don't you bother with anything else that is
> going on here. Wayne is so stupid as not to realize there are many ways of
> saying things, all equally correct. What a dunce! My original criticism of
> him stands. He is only half educated and doomed to remain that way
> forevermore.
>
>> More squeaks from the shadow:

>
> Either write in verse or prose. Your half-way measures are off putting to
> say the least. Also, try to strive for some consistency of style in your
> writing. This present message of yours is a hodgepodge of styles. It makes
> one wonder if you even went to college and if so what kind of college. It
> is amazing how your verse can make you come across as sounding more
> educated than you are whereas your prose exposes you for what you are.
> Just barely made it through high school - right?
>
>>>You [Wayne] at this time are the biggest name caller ever
>>>to post here.

>>
>> Wait, I'm confused - is that only 'at this time' or
>> 'ever'? And from whom did nged copy his habit of sloppy
>> overstatement? 'Ever' is an oddly familiar word, and it
>> is such a long, long time. Exactly what parameter(s)
>> would we measure to verify nged's 'biggest' claim?
>>
>> While I can certainly manage to avoid responding to the
>> DO-NG twins' thoughtless, pointless, endless repetitions
>> of 'Poet of ****' for weeks, it is true that I'm likely
>> to coin an interesting (and most often true even though
>> unkind) remark or two about a mindless non-entity (aka
>> puppet or self-parodying persona) or two from time to
>> time here at ARBR.
>>
>> But when it comes to shotgunning baseless insults (aka
>> lies!), to borrow a phrase, "I am the underdog, in that
>> there should be no doubt." Since Edgy has historically
>> (errantly) referred to the hundreds (maybe thousands) of
>> ARBR readers, using about six vile misnomers per post
>> (e.g., morons, idiots, cowards) roughly twice a week for
>> many months now, he'd be pretty tough to top.

>
> Anyone who has ever been called a name by me should be honored. It is
> truly deserved and should be an occasion for the miscreant to correct his
> abominable behavior.
>
>>>Nothing up my sleeve

>>
>> Gnot big gnews, ngolem - gno sleeve, gno arm, gnot a
>> real person...

> [...]
>
> YAWN! Very tiresome. Wayne is writing for himself of course. Can there be
> any doubt? He should try not to be so self absorbed.
>
> Wayne Logo (Leggett), the Poet of ARBR, is not at least making any more
> references to **** and cum, so I believe some progress is being made. It
> is no good to have a facility with words if you have no taste and your
> mind is constantly in the gutter.
>
> His post is way too long and only I am bothering to read it I am sure.
> Wayne needs to work on being more to the point and not wandering about in
> a daze so much. If he listens to me, he will improve his communication
> with this group. If he doesn't listen to me, he will end up just writing
> to and for himself (a form of onanism). I should really be charging him
> for my services.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>
>
>
>
 

nget

New Member
Feb 24, 2004
332
0
0
Edward Dolan said:
"nget" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> LoGo USA Wrote:
>> Greetings gang -
>>
>> and his artless, inarticulate
>> (and inanimate) accomplice,
>>
>>
>>
>> With warmest wishes,
>> Wayne

>
> I am the underdog, in that there should be no doubt. If all were
> wordsmiths and no one left to make even a loaf of bread, then all would
> starve. It is going to take more than this fluff to get much of a
> response from me.
> "I am a human being" from the film "Elephant man" Wrote:
>>
>> Mark

>
>
> --
> nget


Nonsense! Your remark about Wayne Leggett being the Poet of **** was on the
order of genius and far better than anything he has written so far.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Maybe I do have the advantage in that I can always increase my vocabulary, while Wayne doesn't have much of a chance to get smart. He will just have to make the best of it.
Mark
 

nget

New Member
Feb 24, 2004
332
0
0
Mike Rice said:
On 16 Dec 2005 12:57:13 -0800, "LoGo USA" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hey guys-
>
>This is a long post, pretty much just what will probably
>my last posting this year - the end product of notes I've
>popped off - berating the misguided miscreant who still
>stubbornly continues to litter the ARBR archives with
>mean-spirited self-indulgent drivel posted in the names
>of Ed Dolan and nget. Don't waste your time reading any
>further unless you enjoy the humiliation of this sad
>(but very deserving) simpleton. Anyway, here we go again:
>
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
>AWWW-WWW... both sides of the Dolan-nget duality (aka
>DO-NG) are unhappy. While his virtual stepchild nged
>(nget with a dash of Dolan) poor-mouths:
>
>>I am the underdog, in that there should be no doubt.

>


There's no need to fear, Underdog is here!

Indiana Mike

Good for you Mike to use what I said to make a joke. Another poster who only shows up here once in a while used that same line to attack another person on the group. What a shame that some have no sense of humor.
Willapa Mark
 
E

Edward Dolan

Guest
"LoGo USA" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
[...]
>>I am never that inspired although I try to be as equally
>>as truthful [awkward, meaningless phrasing sic] in my own
>>inimitable manner.


It would have been better to write:

>>I am never that inspired although I try to be equally
>>as truthful in my own inimitable manner.


One extra "as" and Wayne goes crazy.

I could go through my entire post and make these minor corrections one by
one, but why bother. I am not writing for publication. I am writing for half
educated jackasses like Wayne Leggett. It goes without saying that I could
take a few extra seconds and perfect my writing way beyond anything that the
Poet of **** could ever achieve.

But more to the point, what is wrong with Wayne's style? It is highly
affected and so rings false. He writes to impress, never realizing that he
is being obvious, thereby negating the desired effect. Only the half
educated like him will be impressed. The fully educated, such as yours
truly, will never be impressed. What impresses my kind is prose simply
written that anyone can understand right off the bat. I don't think he is
capable of that.

Surprisingly, Mr. Tom Sherman is an amazingly good writer. I say
surprisingly because he so wrong headed on so many political issues. Also,
most engineers are terrible writers, almost as bad as most scientists. Wayne
Leggett could learn a lot by following in the footsteps of Mr. Sherman.
Wayne is probably a liberal too like Mr. Sherman since most poets do not
have the brains to be anything else.
[...]

> Sad... All the poor (but much more prolific) partner gets
> to do is play blathering buffoon, using dialog deleted (as
> much too stodgy) from his local priest's Sunday sermon,
> such as:
>
>>... since the only purpose of sex is procreation, anyone
>>who is doing anything in that [soccer?] field without
>>that goal in mind is clearly demented and depraved...


The priests no longer preach the kind of sermons I like to hear, and so I
preach them myself to the ignorant and stupid like you. Wayne probably
thinks sex is mainly something for him to parody in his execrable verse.
[...]

>>I have my style... Communication is of the essence...
>>Repetition is of the essense [sic]... Mr. Dolan is a
>>highly educated person who knows how to use language
>>[BLAH, BLAH, BLAH ad nauseum, ab ovo, ad nauseum, ad
>>infinitum...]


Way too many ellipses. The reader cannot judge what I have written, only
what you have quoted. Selective quoting is ever the hallmark of a scoundrel.
By the way, it is no mortal sin to use the same word more than once. If it
were, you would be in Hell for all eternity.
[...]

> Herewith, a FREE and much-needed tutorial in creative
> writing - Edgy wrote [all sic, sic, sic]:


Wayne is sick all right! Mainly he needs to stop reading for details
(peccadilloes really) and concentrate on substance. I am a man of big ideas
and so that is what I concentrate on. Wayne is strictly into details and
seems to be devoid of substance. I think it comes from his interest in
verse, where details really do count. However, in prose as it applies here
on ARBR ideas are what count.

>>Does anyone but me get the feeling that [NAME WITHHELD
>>BY SPECIAL REQUEST] is constantly resorting to freakish
>>words to impress others by his vocabulary. Unfortunately
>>for him, it is having just the opposite effect. It is
>>something that is done by the half educated who think
>>they have to use big and/or odd words to convince others
>>that they are not really as dumb as they know themselves
>>to be.

>
> While any fairly bright twelve-year-old might write:
>
> Does anyone else feel that Edgy uses freakish words in an
> effort to impress others with [not by] his vocabulary?
> Unfortunately for him, this habit [not it] has the
> opposite effect. Using odd words [again not it] is a
> common practice for a poorly educated writer, as he tries
> to convince readers that he [correcting Edgy's pronoun-
> antecedent error] is really not as dumb as he himself
> knows he is. Edgy should not even profess to understand
> what a modestly educated person has written, much less
> attempt to criticize or emulate it.


Nope, I wrote it better. Your version is weak, my version is strong. But
more importantly, my version is me and your freaking version is freaking
you. Better to stick to your verse and leave the prose to me.

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

PS. Hey, Indiana Mike, am I being too nasty with this bozo? I need you to
keep me on track with the new, improved version of Ed Dolan. I am trying to
shake those dark rainbows you mentioned but I can feel them closing in on
me.
 
E

Edward Dolan

Guest
"LoGo USA" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
[...]
>>By all means go to his [Wayne's] blog, ever the province
>>of scum bags [sic], scoundrels and knaves.


Screw it! I have had it up to here with English words that either have to be
combined or separated by a hyphen. The Germans are the masters of extremely
long words. As far as I am concerned, when in doubt use separate words.
Anyone but a numskull will be able to read it perfectly. I wrote scum bag,
not scumbag and not scum-bag. Have I not already told you several times that
I am too lazy to look up **** like this. It comes from my being a librarian
in a former life.

What irritates me about this poor poet trying to correct me (perish the
thought) is that there are multiple ways of writing words and composing
sentences. My 'scum bag' is quite correct depending on the dictionary. God
help him if I were to do to him what he does to me. He reeks of errors,
besides making the main one of never having anything worthwhile to say.

I have called him a poor poet for good reason as he has not written anything
lately that is any good. He needs to write something to this group that I
can enjoy. It has to be well written, well thought out and not involve ****
and cum. If he is able to do this, I will drop my present criticism of him.
I know poets are sensitive and that is what I like best about them. I
enjoyed his first effort when it was about me being a troll. I sent it to
everyone I know and we had a good laugh. He needs to figure out how to be
critical of me without insulting me. Is he up to the challenge?

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota
 
J

Johnny Sunset

Guest
Edward Dolan wrote:
> ...
> Wayne Logo (Leggett), the Poet of ARBR, is not at least making any more
> references to **** and cum...


For the first:
<http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/camp_defecation/dt23_09p12-13.html>
and for the second:
<http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/sexual_discharges/lv15_16a.html>.
--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley
"went over to the next burrough for a flu shot before mass hysteria set

in: the superduper where the shot fest was held sent out a karate man
who subtley bent muh CR-18 double wall 27" rim." - G. Daniels