Howdy from Kentucky

[annabenedetti]

lol so you are the all knowing user here who knows what every single user ever posted ever and you can positively rule out that what I'm saying happened happened.

Any ideas why you must be so contrary all the time?

Why am I being contrary this time? Because you're insulting Tim Staples. Tim Staples doesn't deserve that.

You're implying our resident troll (but not just ours, he's been banned at other forums and on Twitter as well), someone who's a nasty, foul-mouthed manic with anger management problems is the same person as a well-respected Catholic Answers apologist, author, and radio personality, based on your faulty memory and speculation that "jousting" might imply "foulness."

It's ludicrous.

 

[Idolater]

Why am I being contrary this time?

See below.

Because you're insulting Tim Staples. Tim Staples doesn't deserve that.

You're implying our resident troll (but not just ours, he's been banned at other forums and on Twitter as well) someone who's a nasty, foul-mouthed manic with anger management problems is the same person as a well-respected Catholic Answers apologist, author, and radio personality, based on your faulty memory and speculation that "jousting" might imply "foulness."

It's ludicrous.

Spin. There's a more charitable way to describe my posts in this thread, and you've opted not to go that route.

For some reason.

For some contrary reason.

 

[annabenedetti]

Spin. There's a more charitable way to describe my posts in this thread, and you've opted not to go that route.

Whoops, I think you lost your moral high ground.

For some reason.

For some contrary reason.

I told you why. And it has nothing to do with me. I'm defending the good name of someone else that you're smearing by association with no evidence whatsoever. I'll say it as many times as necessary. Again:

Because you're insulting Tim Staples. Tim Staples doesn't deserve that.

You're implying our resident troll (but not just ours, he's been banned at other forums and on Twitter as well) someone who's a nasty, foul-mouthed manic with anger management problems is the same person as a well-respected Catholic Answers apologist, author, and radio personality, based on your faulty memory and speculation that "jousting" might imply "foulness."

It's ludicrous.

 

[Idolater]

Whoops, I think you lost your moral high ground.

Coz I ever claimed to have it?

I told you why. And it has nothing to do with me. I'm defending the good name of someone else that you're smearing by association with no evidence whatsoever.

I never did that.

I'll say it as many times as necessary. Again:

Because you're insulting Tim Staples.

Didn't do that.

Tim Staples doesn't deserve that.

You're implying our resident troll (but not just ours, he's been banned at other forums and on Twitter as well) someone who's a nasty, foul-mouthed manic with anger management problems is the same person as a well-respected Catholic Answers apologist, author, and radio personality, based on your faulty memory

My memory's not faulty in this matter. Maybe in others, sure, but not here. I know what I saw, because it's the only reason I even thought to mention what I did.

and speculation that "jousting" might imply "foulness."

I did nothing wrong or even incorrect or inaccurate.

It's ludicrous.

It's perhaps false but it isn't ludicrous.

But you are contrary.

 

[Sherman]

Because he may have claimed he's Time Staples doesn't mean he is. He's too foul to be the apologist.

 

[Idolater]

Because he may have claimed he's Tim Staples doesn't mean he is.

Agreed!

He's too foul to be the apologist.

Just for the record, I meant no disrespect to the actual Mr. Staples in offering his own quote from his own Wikipedia article. I myself am extremely "nasty" and "foul-mouthed" at times, so I would only be disrespecting myself to suggest or imply that it somehow detracts from someone's character if they were like me.

 

[ok doser]

Any ideas why you must be so contrary all the time?

Because she's a troll

 

[Idolater]

Because she's a troll

It's easy to take unexamined capricious contrariness personally.

Not my fault.

 

[Idolater]

Turns out, the guy just printed the link's words as if they were his own. Plagiarism.

Not my fault.

And also, again, just to reiterate, that I was in no way impugning or harming the actual Mr. Tim Staples' reputation: I myself am plenty "nasty" and "foul-mouthed" sometimes, and so I definitely don't hold that against anybody else, ever, especially since I 'suffer from' the same 'condition.' (If Romans 2:1 says " Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things," then I'm sure not going to knowingly be on the 'receiving end' of that scripture.)

I disagree with lots of folks, and sometimes they're even 'nasty' or 'foul-mouthed' in their expression of their views, but I don't hold that against anybody, especially since as a Catholic I believe there is a distinction between grave and light sins.

Once I saw my error here, when I finally found that link that I was looking for, do you think I was thinking an 'expletive'? Coz I wasn't. I knew that what I had said was truthful, viz. that I had seen a post where one of these 'Catholic Crusader', 'Red Wave Rising', 'Trump Gurl' sock accounts had claimed to be Mr. Staples. And I knew that actually happened, because I remember 'doing a double take' and checking the link to the book, and the text of the post was "In my book ... " so I was fooled by doing a sloppy job of checking sources, which is OK because I'm not a journalist, and this 'sock' account was plagiarizing.

And as far as being 'foul-mouthed' and acting a little different on the internet compared to irl, has anyone here ever seen Sozo on a bad day? He could make a sailor blush lol. I respect Sozo and I respect the real Mr. Staples.

 

[annabenedetti]

Turns out, the guy just printed the link's words as if they were his own. Plagiarism.

Not my fault.

He didn't plagiarize. He gave a link and an excerpt, like everyone else does.

Okay, it's not your fault that you looked at the excerpt, saw the "I" and then assumed he was Tim Staples.

Even though it was clearly an excerpt and therefore not intended to be plagiarism, and nowhere did he "claim" to be Tim Staples, it's not your fault you assumed he must be the author, and it's not your fault you remembered he "claimed" to be Tim Staples.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Reminder that this thread is in the Newbie forum, which isn't a location for discussion. Please take any further discussion to the appropriate forum.