Comments on: OCA/CUNY BSA Hearing next week; Does QCA qualify as community use?

By: R. Belhinge

R. Belhinge — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 03:08:42 +0000

I have only just returned from a very nice weekend in the Ardennes. I hope everyone else had a pleasant time. In any case, I would never insist on having the last word.

By: Charlie

Charlie — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:19:59 +0000

Go ahead, have the last word. Only immature people get caught up in that train of thought, so post away; I know you need to.

Charlie.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:05:19 +0000

So who’s a kid? Look at all your infantile posts. Bet you can’t resist having the last word.

By: Charlie

Charlie — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:40:04 +0000

It’s no wonder you’re keeping this up; you’re a kid, or at least sound like one.

Charlie.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:31:09 +0000

No, YOU hang up…

By: Charlie

Charlie — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:09:41 +0000

Enough already. As I said, we’re the only two here.

Charlie.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 14:30:09 +0000

Wrong again 76, as 75, I know for certain that I am not the same person as 73.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:26:15 +0000

I knew you were going to do this. It happens like clockwork after I post a respose to you. You’re not fooling anyone. The writing style is even the same. This thread is old and ready to be pushed to the next page. No one is reading or posting on this anymore, especially on the Labor Day weekend; except for me & you.

Charlie.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:16:49 +0000

Did I miss something? When was ‘Charlie’ (is that his real name?) appointed arbitor of fact, style, and blog usage? He obviously has no clue what a waste of time his posts are to us.

By: Charlie

Charlie — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:06:26 +0000

You see, by now writing in a conversational style, you have shown that your other posts were as I said; for your amusment. It was all a put-on, in an attempt to entertain yourself by misleading others. Your mixing in French terms, the ridiculous overuse of commas, your meandering style, the use of too many words rarely heard in general conversation; belied your stated intent .

The use of sentences which make no sense, which you’re still using, even in this most recent post of yours, such as; “I struggle to understand what advantage you seek by promoting falsehood in a public forum devoted to sharing information and opinion”. there’s no advantage to be sought; stated, implied, or otherwise. Plus, you are not sharing opinion. You’ve only been sharing nonsense, and attempting to look good doing it.

Here’s your closing line: “How does this help your neighborhood to form a consensus?” A consensus on what? Perhaps the consensus is that you’re a phoney; so stop with the fake whining about how you’re insulted and abused.

Oh, and don’t start making phoney anonymous posts, pretending to be others in support of yourself, and making silly statement about me.

I’ve called you out. Now, take your ball & glove off the johnny pump and go home.

Charlie.

By: R. Belhinge

R. Belhinge — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 18:17:05 +0000

Charlie, I have visited the discussion regarding the arrival of Met Food and found your last communication. I would not call it a “response,” however. I understand that you do not care for the way in which I express myself, but you have never responded to anything in particular. I have asked you how I have offended you that you insult me repeatedly. I have asked you to supply some support for your repeated allegation that I am another correspondent, one “Dr. Sigmond Amondier.” You have said that I am banned from another site, a statement also unmatched by reality, unless you can somehow make it true. I struggle to understand what advantage you seek by promoting falsehood in a public forum devoted to sharing information and opinion. How does this help your neighborhood to form a consensus?

By: Charlie

Charlie — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 00:44:21 +0000

Oh smug one, go to the other thread where you’re posting, and read my response.

Charlie.

By: R. Belhinge

R. Belhinge — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:41:28 +0000

If there is, as you say, no offense, Charlie, then why is it necessary to offend me? Are you such a superior being, one chosen to police the content of this site? And as such, do your motives and actions require no clarification or correction? “Off the wall,” indeed! (I know what it signifies, professor)

By: Charlie

Charlie — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:07:48 +0000

R. Belhinge is off this wall, # 68, and it’s in many places. If you observe it from the appropriate angle, you’ll easily find it.

Charlie.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:40:50 +0000

Ah, Sir Belhinge - Let me introduce you to the 21st century. “off the wall” is an exprssion in the vernacular describing someone who is “wacky”. It is also the title of an album by “Wacko Jacko” (Michael Jackson). Perhaps it comes from the practice of people in solitary confinement who literally bounce off the wall to express their emotions. Sound familiar????

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:47:33 +0000

Someone please tell me where is this wall? I want to see what is off this wall?

By: Charlie

Charlie — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:40:34 +0000

Repeated here, there, and everywhere the writing comes off the wall.

Charlie.

By: R. Belhinge

R. Belhinge — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:07:51 +0000

Accusations enough, “Charlie,” repeated here and elsewhere. “Off the wall,” indeed.

By: Charlie

Charlie — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:40:28 +0000

No accusations, no withdrawals, do not pass go, just to the point.

Charlie.

By: R. Belhinge

R. Belhinge — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:04:38 +0000

Very well, Sir, but now you might withdraw the accusations.

By: Charlie

Charlie — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:36:03 +0000

No offense, no slander, just off the wall, and been down this road before.

Charlie.

By: R. Belhinge

R. Belhinge — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 08:57:27 +0000

Alas, mon cher Charlie, how am I to offer a “response” when I have not been properly addressed?

You contend that you know who I am, but you are bluffing. You know nothing about me, Monsieur.

I now ask you, as one gentleman to another: What have I said that so offended you that you slander me and accuse me of being someone that I am not?

Until my sunset becomes your sunrise, I humbly await your response, if you please,

R. Belhinge
Antwerp

By: Charlie

Charlie — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 05:43:43 +0000

Yep #”s 57, 59; it appears that you see it too. Now if we can only get him, bugsbunny, and licresident (I know there’s been more than one) to engage in verbal discourse to the amusement of all of the readers here.

Hey everyone, don’t let this person pull your leg. It’s his or her idea of humor, or practical joking.

Hey # 59, I’m really looking forward to the response from the good former doctor.

Charlie.

By: R. Belhinge

R. Belhinge — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:08:37 +0000

“Anonymous” (#59) does not know any of the above, therefore how he may be “sure” of any of it fills me with awe, and no little dismay. The truth is, Sir, that you know nothing of me, at this time. I have never been banned from a forum of any sort, and have never corresponded with “QW,” whatever that may be. As for “bugsbunny,” I would assume he is a fictitious creature invoked to enhance the case you wish others to entertain. In any case, I am not familiar with any of his correspondence. Finally (and once again), I will have you know that I am not a Doctor, infamous or otherwise, Sir, and would appreciate relief from such surmise, thus permuted into false characterizations.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:43:46 +0000

Charlie - I am sure that R.Belhinge is the esteemed (infamous) Doctor under a new guise. He has also just appeared on the post re: Metfoods. Oh my gawd - I’m expecting bugsbunny to show up any minute now!
liqcity be warned - both these characters were banned from QW about a year ago.