StopSylvia email: "Hummmmmm"

Shall we look at some more of your claims?

4) That RSL's site is badly laid out

Claim 4 is opinion, rather than fact.
Click to expand...

Lol, this is what im up against. I gave my opinion that his site was badly laid out, you nit pick and say "oh you claimed this" then you dismiss it by saying its opinion rather than fact.

IT WAS ALWAYS MY OPINION, I gave my opinion on his site, That has to be one of the most pathetic displays i have ever read on this site. You should be ashamed. Another reason why this thread is dead, certain taking things stupidly out of context so they can jump on the bandwagon and have a go.
 
I can assure you I'm not ashamed of being able to tell the difference between claims of opinion and claims of fact. That's part of what being sceptical and thinking critically is about.
 
Agatha said:
I can assure you I'm not ashamed of being able to tell the difference between claims of opinion and claims of fact. That's part of what being sceptical and thinking critically is about.
Click to expand...

You are convincing no one. Its truly pathetic the lengths you went to just to have a go, to jump on the bandwagon. Truly truly pathetic.
 
mushy said:
You are convincing no one. Its truly pathetic the lengths you went to just to have a go, to jump on the bandwagon. Truly truly pathetic.
Click to expand...

To add to my earlier question:

If we are pathetic, and if we are sycophantic, and if we will agree with RSL anyway, then why are you wasting your time trying to point things out which, according to you, are not being accepted by us anyway?

This is not a rhetorical question, I really want answer.
 
No, Fiona took it with her when she left. :(
 
Bram Kaandorp said:
To add to my earlier question:

If we are pathetic, and if we are sycophantic, and if we will agree with RSL anyway, then why are you wasting your time trying to point things out which, according to you, are not being accepted by us anyway?

This is not a rhetorical question, I really want answer.
Click to expand...


It's called trolling.

And a rather poor attempt at it.
 
AdMan said:
It's called trolling.

And a rather poor attempt at it.
Click to expand...

If by "trolling" you mean "saying things he doesn't really believe just to stir up indignation", I don't think that really applies to mushy in this thread. I think he sees what he truly perceives as a "double standard" (both here and on SSB), and is attempting to point this out. If and when he offers evidence, we will analyze and respond to it (in, I hope, a constructive way). Calling him a Troll, (accurate or not) is no more constructive than him calling me "nasty", or Agatha (I think it was) "pathetic".

I hope that the remainder of this thread will be conducted in a less confrontational manner (on all sides).
 
I'm still wondering how much Sylvia Umbridge er... I mean Browne is bringing in with her booksales, readings, etc.
I remember she recently released a new book but it didn't do so hot.
 
mushy said:
Oh you got me! Its true, im actually an evil underling of Sylvia Browne, sent fourth to do her bidding and discredit the pesky Robert Lancaster. I'll return now, to queen Sylvia and tell her that yet another dastardly plan has been foiled by those clever folk over at JREF!!! Damn you all!!!!!
Click to expand...

Mushy, you might wanna read the rules here unless you want to be smushy by the mods.
 
RSLancastr said:
If by "trolling" you mean "saying things he doesn't really believe just to stir up indignation", I don't think that really applies to mushy in this thread. I think he sees what he truly perceives as a "double standard" (both here and on SSB), and is attempting to point this out. If and when he offers evidence, we will analyze and respond to it (in, I hope, a constructive way). Calling him a Troll, (accurate or not) is no more constructive than him calling me "nasty", or Agatha (I think it was) "pathetic".
Click to expand...


It may be splitting hairs, but I called his behavior in this thread trolling.

And I would define that as posting deliberately provocative messages with the intention of causing disruption and argument.

I don't know what his motivation is or was, or if he truly believes what he says, but his posts did come across like trolling to me, given he hasn't yet provided the evidence he promised he would show.
 
Last edited:
mushy said:
So he claims, yet he never publishes any emails of success stories. How balanced is that?
Click to expand...

RSL has made it clear that if he ever get sucess stories from Browne's stories, he would publish it.
Well if Browne was truly pshyic , you would think RSL would be getting a lot of those.
 
mushy said:
Lol, this is what im up against. I gave my opinion that his site was badly laid out, you nit pick and say "oh you claimed this" then you dismiss it by saying its opinion rather than fact.

IT WAS ALWAYS MY OPINION, I gave my opinion on his site, That has to be one of the most pathetic displays i have ever read on this site. You should be ashamed. Another reason why this thread is dead, certain taking things stupidly out of context so they can jump on the bandwagon and have a go.
Click to expand...

Since you've changed your mind about leaving this thread and have instead decided to continue posting, why not post that evidence you claim you have that Robert is lying about the number of positive emails he receives?
 
mushy said:
Prove that the email he posted from people accusing her of ripping them off are "accurate information" please.

but yet again you are all ignorant to the point. Just because someone is a fraud ITS NOTS ok to publish any random email to a wide audience like he does. Why dont you understand that?
Click to expand...

Why don't you understand that he has permission from the writers to publish their emails?

Or do you just want to suppress valid proof against your idol?

Ms. Browne is your idol, right? You're not on her payroll ... right?
 
mushy said:
SHOCKER!! Wouldnt expect anything else from a hardcore sycophant like you. And i know i know before you come back with your predictable reply, i know you resent being called a sycophant and this thread is the evidence you are one and no i wont take it back.

See that, i knew your exact reply, you should think for a second about how predicable you are.
Click to expand...

Just repeating what was said at you, -10 troll score.

At this point in the thread your putting off a real " Forgot his lines" vibe, which usually means, in regards to posters that post in the style you do, your running out of steam.
 
RSLancastr said:
If by "trolling" you mean "saying things he doesn't really believe just to stir up indignation", I don't think that really applies to mushy in this thread. I think he sees what he truly perceives as a "double standard" (both here and on SSB), and is attempting to point this out. If and when he offers evidence, we will analyze and respond to it (in, I hope, a constructive way). Calling him a Troll, (accurate or not) is no more constructive than him calling me "nasty", or Agatha (I think it was) "pathetic".

I hope that the remainder of this thread will be conducted in a less confrontational manner (on all sides).
Click to expand...

Rob, as much as i applaud your demeanor, i think your getting the wrong vibe from the people , rightly calling Mushy out on trollin.

Your seeing troll as an equivalent to "jerk" , "knob", "a-hole", or any other direct insult, the actual meaning is secondary to the effect of angering someone by saying it. ( no one really believes someone the call an a-hole is actually the last part of someones digestive system that somehow gained sentience.)

But it is more akin to calling someone a Barroom Brawler, a dirty fighter, a Tax Cheat, a mean drunk, or a mooch. Which is to say, while the title is probably going to cause the person some kind of anger , it is used for the purposes of warning others that they have a history of a certain type of behavior, and to watch out for and avoid this kind of behavior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom