the oblate spheroid removes herself from the jury pool

[Kyle Ricky]

nadinbrzezinski (107,519 posts)
snip
So given the numbers of subjects that are not kosher... well, I guess I will reduce quite a bit of my activity to the writers forums, the Photography forum, and other sub forums.
snip

Nads is so high on herself. She thinks that without her the DUmp will die. Actually, with out here, the DUmp will just lose another loony chew toy. God, that fugly little troll is so retarded.

[franksolich]

Nads is so high on herself. She thinks that without her the DUmp will die.

All the primitives think that way.

[franksolich]

Nads is so high on herself. She thinks that without her the DUmp will die.

What I personally find most irritating about the oblate spheroid is her chutzpah-ish belief that by putting a primitive on her "iggy list," she's punishing him, depriving him of something.

Gawd, the gall she has.

[RWKindaGuy]

What I personally find most irritating about the oblate spheroid is her chutzpah-ish belief that by putting a primitive on her "iggy list," she's punishing him, depriving him of something.

Gawd, the gall she has.

Yes, a punishment worse than death itself.  What will 87.581 percent of DU do?  (that's just an estimate of her iggy list , but probably accurate)

[Kyle Ricky]

What I personally find most irritating about the oblate spheroid is her chutzpah-ish belief that by putting a primitive on her "iggy list," she's punishing him, depriving him of something.

Gawd, the gall she has.

Yes, a punishment worse than death itself.  What will 87.581 percent of DU do?  (that's just an estimate of her iggy list , but probably accurate)

I would take going on Nads ignore list as a good thing. The less interaction you have with that bald headed retard, the less stupid you get.

[obumazombie]

What I personally find most irritating about the oblate spheroid is her chutzpah-ish belief that by putting a primitive on her "iggy list," she's punishing him, depriving him of something.

Gawd, the gall she has.

What if everyone took the position that they were removing themselves from the jury pool ? I think that should be grounds for banning.

[Skul]

Still going. 

Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #43)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 08:32 PM
 nadinbrzezinski (107,732 posts)
44. Trust me I laugh about the stalkers

but the issue of stalking and bullying has legal implications to it. And as you can see from a response above, can lead to serous consequences.

NO, I am not fond of sugar coating things either. And that is a problem.

But as far as I am concerned, I will simply do what I think I need to do, boycott the system. Occupy: Guide to the Perplexed http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/120904
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #44)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 09:21 PM
 UnrepentantLiberal (6,765 posts)
49. Questioning your expertise can have serious consequences?

Being a little melodramatic, aren't we? Especially when you're right there in the middle of it snarking it up with the best of them.  My punk rock band's collector's item single: http://www.thelizerds.com
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #43)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 08:51 AM
SlimJimmy (1,607 posts)
56. Nope, that's not it. But you were *really* close.

Methinks you are judged too harshly because occasionally you dare to bring up your actual expertise that's a laugh, right there and some just can't handle their assumptions dealing with the face of knowledge and experience.
And you're not all sweet an cuddly about it. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, ... they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to SlimJimmy (Reply #56)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 12:42 PM
 TreasonousBastard (19,435 posts)
70. Don't go there. She hasn't been any more...

"wrong" than most people here,oh yes she has and at least once spectacularly in error. But, often as not, the veracity of her statements has nothing to do with whether or not she gets trashed.

I see that her main tormentor has been shown the door, so we'll see about the future.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #70)
Thu Aug 9, 2012, 01:01 PM
SlimJimmy (1,607 posts)
71. I was referring to her condecending attitude toward anyone that might happen

to respectfully disagree with her. I've been on the receiving end of that on a few occasions. I don't follow her around, and only comment in threads that pique my interest, whether she's in them or not. But I won't cow-tow to anyone, and that includes Nadin.


“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, ... they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 09:24 PM
 zappaman (5,757 posts)
50. Will we get an OP like this everytime you get a post hidden?

Last edited Wed Aug 8, 2012, 09:25 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Cool!
 *SNORK*
 

*Snork* indeed. 

[franksolich]

Still going. 
*Snork* indeed. 

Good find.

I suppose I'll have to get into the habit of checking back on campfires myself, to see if there's anything new.

Great work!

[Skul]

Dug some of those tidbits up yesterday, and saved them.
They had gNads and sabrinanumber running in circles trying to stomp out little fires.
GNads must have put her gNomex panties in the drier, cause she got her ample heiney blistered.