Speaking of the âpersona known asâ đ Iâve just remembered an incident on Dogs involving me, the âpersona known asâ, NAA, and Clare.
Now I know Clare gets a lot of negative reviews around these parts, and I certainly do get why. But in fairness, she was the one who came to my rescue when NAA was ritually trashing me, because she was absolutely convinced I was lusting after âthe persona known asâ, who was going through one of his self-absorbed, navel-gazing eras at the time.
I recall posting something like âIâm here for youâ, because I did feel sad for him. Others were posting along the same lines too, but NAA didnât give a flying fuk about that. She focused her baleful glare on me alone. And she was always right. About everything. All the time. She decided I was definitely chasing the âpersonaâsâ ass đ
It was Clare who waded in to set NAA straight and finally got her to STFU. I was thankful for that because, as we know, NAA wasâŚ.a lot! đ¤Ł
Â
 The Odious Claire wasn't loyal to anyone.  If she took your side it was because she wanted to piss off NAA. She was perhaps one of the nastiest posters around.
 Seconded, she would gather a little group of clingons (and guests, which was her and the aforementioned) to back her up when her jealous vitriol was having an outing...she was vile.Â
 Yes, I saw some of that hounding bullshit in my time at Dogs.  I did say I do understand the reasons for all the Claire animosity đ¤ˇđťââď¸
 No need to get arsey about it and start on the sarcastic italics.  Calm tf down
 You calm down, and posts like your previous one will not be allowed. You are not on Dogs now.
Â
 Say what you like about dogs but by god it was a bastion of free speech.  You could say what you needed to say and it would get through.  Thatâs why a lot of the snides didnt like it as they couldnât shut the argument down.  It wasnât perfect but it wasnât censored like this.  You were known as sly on there yourself and for good reason !!!!
/\...It was the least 'free speech' forum I have ever been on. Guest posts were vetted and denied far more than here. The owner and mods on Dogs were incredibly biased as to who they allowed free speech to. And let's not forget, the majority of guest posts on Dogs were allowed because a good % were from the owner and the members, backing themelves up.Â
 Say what you like about dogs but by god it was a bastion of free speech.  You could say what you needed to say and it would get through.  Thatâs why a lot of the snides didnt like it as they couldnât shut the argument down.  It wasnât perfect but it wasnât censored like this.  You were known as sly on there yourself and for good reason !!!!
 I very rarely engage with colon-dwelling Anons intent on rustling up some shite on here. But okayâŚIâll play for once.
Interesting to see you use the word âsnideâ. Projection much?
If you feel so strongly about saying what you âneedâ to say, thatâs fine. But why donât you post it under your recognisable username, instead of posting as a chickenshit Anon?Â
Thatâs the very definition of being a âsnideâ, non? đ¤ˇđťââď¸
__________________
âSome people are going to leave a mark on this world, while others will leave a stainâ ~ Eleanor RooseveltÂ
Speaking of the âpersona known asâ đ Iâve just remembered an incident on Dogs involving me, the âpersona known asâ, NAA, and Clare.
Now I know Clare gets a lot of negative reviews around these parts, and I certainly do get why. But in fairness, she was the one who came to my rescue when NAA was ritually trashing me, because she was absolutely convinced I was lusting after âthe persona known asâ, who was going through one of his self-absorbed, navel-gazing eras at the time.
I recall posting something like âIâm here for youâ, because I did feel sad for him. Others were posting along the same lines too, but NAA didnât give a flying fuk about that. She focused her baleful glare on me alone. And she was always right. About everything. All the time. She decided I was definitely chasing the âpersonaâsâ ass đ
It was Clare who waded in to set NAA straight and finally got her to STFU. I was thankful for that because, as we know, NAA wasâŚ.a lot! đ¤Ł
Â
 The Odious Claire wasn't loyal to anyone.  If she took your side it was because she wanted to piss off NAA. She was perhaps one of the nastiest posters around.
 Seconded, she would gather a little group of clingons (and guests, which was her and the aforementioned) to back her up when her jealous vitriol was having an outing...she was vile.Â
 Yes, I saw some of that hounding bullshit in my time at Dogs.  I did say I do understand the reasons for all the Claire animosity đ¤ˇđťââď¸
 No need to get arsey about it and start on the sarcastic italics.  Calm tf down
 You calm down, and posts like your previous one will not be allowed. You are not on Dogs now.
Â
 Say what you like about dogs but by god it was a bastion of free speech.  You could say what you needed to say and it would get through.  Thatâs why a lot of the snides didnt like it as they couldnât shut the argument down.  It wasnât perfect but it wasnât censored like this.  You were known as sly on there yourself and for good reason !!!!
 Not quite true.  So long as you didn't challenge the owner or mods your posts got through. Anyone who challenged the persona known as Stooo got booted off.  I've never known a forum be so bad for bans.
__________________
Your name is being called by sacred things that are not addressed nor listened to. Sometimes they blow trumpets