(11-20-2022, 09:00 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/ErrolWebber/status/1...tjrWw&s=19
(11-20-2022, 08:12 PM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ]Funny how there are no left leaning accounts that need to be reinstated…
Kathy Griffin was a big one.. But she said she's not coming back anyway lolol
But she was just banned. I’m talking about ones from before Elon took over. She didn’t even get banned when she help up a bloody trump head back then…lol
(11-20-2022, 10:07 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1594...1LyVg&s=19
The responses are so golden lolol
He is such a troll and I’m here for it!
.gif "Laughing")
(11-21-2022, 10:48 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]So trolling is good now?
The owner gets to do what he likes. That's the nature of ownership.
(11-21-2022, 10:48 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]So trolling is good now?
If you pay 44 billion dollars for something, you can do whatever you want.
(11-21-2022, 11:37 AM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2022, 10:48 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]So trolling is good now?
If you pay 44 billion dollars for something, you can do whatever you want.
I pay $0 and do whatever I want over there..
Course I have like 4 banned accounts tho lolol
You don't like it, get your own, right?
(11-21-2022, 11:09 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2022, 10:48 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]So trolling is good now?
The owner gets to do what he likes. That's the nature of ownership.
I didn't ask if he's allowed to do so. I asked if it was good.
(11-21-2022, 12:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2022, 11:09 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]The owner gets to do what he likes. That's the nature of ownership.
I didn't ask if he's allowed to do so. I asked if it was good.
Stop whining. Of course, you'll deny it, but it's obvious to anyone reading this thread you have a bug up your [BLEEP] about Elon Musk for whatever reason.
When a network with a clear and open bias doubles back on itself in a very public manner, anyone and everyone is entitled to 'troll' them. They set themselves up for it because rather than use reasoned logic in making their Twitter decision, as a nonbiased network would, they immediately caved to their foot stomping, snowflake agenda.
CBS looks stupid now and have made their bias even more obvious.
(11-21-2022, 12:50 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2022, 12:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I didn't ask if he's allowed to do so. I asked if it was good.
Stop whining. Of course, you'll deny it, but it's obvious to anyone reading this thread you have a bug up your [BLEEP] about Elon Musk for whatever reason.
When a network with a clear and open bias doubles back on itself in a very public manner, anyone and everyone is entitled to 'troll' them. They set themselves up for it because rather than use reasoned logic in making their Twitter decision, as a nonbiased network would, they immediately caved to their foot stomping, snowflake agenda.
CBS looks stupid now and have made their bias even more obvious.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
The posts all have numbers. In which number post was I whining?
[img src="https://i.imgflip.com/71mp9p.jpg" ]
![[Image: 71mp9p.jpg]](https://i.imgflip.com/71mp9p.jpg)
(11-21-2022, 01:21 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2022, 12:50 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Stop whining. Of course, you'll deny it, but it's obvious to anyone reading this thread you have a bug up your [BLEEP] about Elon Musk for whatever reason.
When a network with a clear and open bias doubles back on itself in a very public manner, anyone and everyone is entitled to 'troll' them. They set themselves up for it because rather than use reasoned logic in making their Twitter decision, as a nonbiased network would, they immediately caved to their foot stomping, snowflake agenda.
CBS looks stupid now and have made their bias even more obvious.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
The posts all have numbers. In which number post was I whining?
#213
I'm pretty sure HB was talking preventive.. I mean, it doesn't take a soothsayer..
Boy howdy, you sure did struggle with posting that, didn't 'cha?
(11-21-2022, 12:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2022, 11:09 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]The owner gets to do what he likes. That's the nature of ownership.
I didn't ask if he's allowed to do so. I asked if it was good.
It's good that owners can do what they like with things that they own.
(11-21-2022, 04:01 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Boy howdy, you sure did struggle with posting that, didn't 'cha?
(11-21-2022, 12:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I didn't ask if he's allowed to do so. I asked if it was good.
It's good that owners can do what they like with things that they own.
Yeah, but I didn't whine about that either.
If you own a field jointly with your wife, and you plant pine in it, and patiently pay the taxes as the pine grows, but don't pay insurance, would it be good for your wife to decide to set the field on fire when the trees are nearly ready for harvest? She would be doing what she likes with things that she owns, so, good in your book, right?
(11-21-2022, 05:57 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2022, 04:01 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Boy howdy, you sure did struggle with posting that, didn't 'cha?
It's good that owners can do what they like with things that they own.
Yeah, but I didn't whine about that either.
If you own a field jointly with your wife, and you plant pine in it, and patiently pay the taxes as the pine grows, but don't pay insurance, would it be good for your wife to decide to set the field on fire when the trees are nearly ready for harvest? She would be doing what she likes with things that she owns, so, good in your book, right?
Good or bad is neither here nor there. You're an idiot for not paying the insurance. Her setting it on fire is a different set of problems. Probably best discussed with a therapist.
(11-21-2022, 05:57 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (11-21-2022, 04:01 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Boy howdy, you sure did struggle with posting that, didn't 'cha?
It's good that owners can do what they like with things that they own.
Yeah, but I didn't whine about that either.
If you own a field jointly with your wife, and you plant pine in it, and patiently pay the taxes as the pine grows, but don't pay insurance, would it be good for your wife to decide to set the field on fire when the trees are nearly ready for harvest? She would be doing what she likes with things that she owns, so, good in your book, right?
I have no idea what you're prattling on about. You asked a question and I gave you a simple, concise, and correct answer. Then you start convulsing or something, I don't know, like your brain locked up or something and you posted and deleted a bunch of things and then going on about buttons and fields and fires. It's odd.