Page 4 of 5

Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 3:00 pm
by King-Eliagh
Never said adverse was not in the dictionary and you didnt use the word adverse. Look do I need to spell it out. You used a word, which you thought was clever, but which did not fit the context of your sentence. Much worse, you actually had the hide to use this stupid word in the same post in which you also suggested that you are more clever than myself. I think the term goose is appropriate for you here.

Let me help you some more you silly goose. The much more appropriate word you might have been looking for would have been oppositional (although I wasn't in fact being oppositional). Not adversive, or even worse adversives, a word which actually doesnt exist.

Truthslayer I'm giving you an absolute whoopin here, back out while you can you silly silly goose and stop pretending to be clever.

Onions whats the score now?

And Onions? Go fukk yourself :arrow: :wink:

Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 3:31 pm
by Onions
What's the fucking score?

Truthsayer 3
Queen E 0

You fucking asked, fuckwit!

Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:09 pm
by King-Eliagh
Thanks Onions.

Now go fuck yourself :lol:

Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:07 pm
by Onions
No you go fuck yourself with a dildo, Queen E!

Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:41 pm
by Truthsayer
King-Eliagh wrote:
Never said adverse was not in the dictionary and you didnt use the word adverse. Look do I need to spell it out. You used a word, which you thought was clever, but which did not fit the context of your sentence. Much worse, you actually had the hide to use this stupid word in the same post in which you also suggested that you are more clever than myself. I think the term goose is appropriate for you here.

Let me help you some more you silly goose. The much more appropriate word you might have been looking for would have been oppositional (although I wasn't in fact being oppositional). Not adversive, or even worse adversives, a word which actually doesnt exist.

Truthslayer I'm giving you an absolute whoopin here, back out while you can you silly silly goose and stop pretending to be clever.
If you think you are beating me, Mr Eliagh, you are seriously mistaken. All you did is demonstrate just how poorly educated you are.

Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 9:25 am
by King-Eliagh
Mr Goose,

Stop being adversive. You and your vegetable buddy are a pair of adversives :lol:

I think this is all that needs to be 'demonstrated' here :lol:

Now to get back on topic. Mr Goose, I cannot believe you suggest the AFL drugs policy is something which would have the potential solve the worlds drug problems. What a naive goose you are. As long as they are available drugs have and will always be used by those who choose to. I think in today's globalised world where drugs and drug use are less controlled than in the past where societies were smaller and more connected with religion and spirituality, that Raiderdave's and the rugby leagues take on drug use is much more effective than the soft, 3 chances and we'll offer you a pillow to get over the come down, policy.

Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 10:09 am
by Onions
Oh I fucking get it now! You're a religious right wing fuck wit! How's Fred Nile, dunderhead?

Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 12:56 pm
by Truthsayer
No, Mr Onions, I do not agree with you. Religion in fact supports drug usage by a simple method of obfuscation and complete ignorance.

Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 2:21 pm
by King-Eliagh
Yes onions, you have missed my point and are in fact being what truthslayer would call, adversive.

Actually truthslayer I'm still awaiting your admission that you really made a fool of yourself back there with your usage of words. Please bow down before your King and admit that while you were trying to suggest I was not clever, you actually made yourself look like a stupid goose. It's ok to admit you were wrong and out of line.

:twisted:

Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 10:30 pm
by Truthsayer
I was not wrong. Your poor education continues to show in brighter lights that New York and Las Vegas combined.

Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2011 1:35 pm
by King-Eliagh
Truthsayer wrote:
I was not wrong. Your poor education continues to show in brighter lights that New York and Las Vegas combined.

So ahh ummm care to look up the word adversives for me?

And I didnt miss the irony in your typo there :lol:

Really you have to stop trying to say I'm poorly educated, it fails everytime! [-X

You may now bow :cool:

Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2011 4:16 pm
by Truthsayer
Adversives is the plural of adversive.

Yes I did commit a typographical error and I am happy to admit this. "That" should of course have been "than".

Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2011 6:54 pm
by King-Eliagh
There is no plural of adversive. And adversive is not the word you thought it was. Adversive is a medical term meaning to turn to one's side during a seizure. Look it up numbnuts. :wink: Go on now, look it up.

Now bow to your King you silly goose :D

Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2011 10:25 pm
by Truthsayer
Adversive is a verb, not a noun, and there is a plural applicable.

Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 5:32 pm
by King-Eliagh
:blahblah:

:puke:

I'll leave this one to the members who are interested to look up themselves. I cant believe i thought a silly goose would be competent to do it. #-o