It seems like I'm live again - thanks uncoolman.

Hello, I thought I had answered your question via private message, and thought you mustn't have read it yet, but after checking the control panel there did seem to be a glitch with your account that was easily fixed. Hopefully you're all good to go now.

many thanks uncoolman. All good now!

Greetings, Torben

 perhaps it was disabled because you are an asshole Torben?

hahaha - great!

Torben, du bist und bleibst so ein furchtbarer Klugscheisser und Besserwisser.
Nu biste also raus aus dem Poof-Club - aber offenbar nicht etwa, weil dir endlich mal ein Licht über die kriminellen Machenschaften der Klicke um die fette Sau Williams aufgegangen wäre - NEIN - DU streitest dich jetzt grossartig um Lehrpunkte und gibst "Gespräche". Sorry, aber du bist einfach zum Kotzen. 

Mein Vorschlag: Kümmer dich lieber mal um deine Familie und halt dein dummes Maul. Vielleicht hat Gott ja Gnade und spült dir dein kleines Hirn durch.

Thorben ein Arschloch? Ja, unterschreibe ich. (natürlich auf Widerruf - schließlich kann sich ein Mensch ändern)

beste Grüße,

ein Weggefährte - aber das ist lange her.

Gast,

Ich glaube, Torben hat viel zu betrachten.

Didaktikon

Former CAI folk,

A quick question, if I may? Did Torben always carry on like this when he was in the CAI?

Blessings,

Ian

Fire away :)

Ian, you may want to refresh your memory on the forum rules in regards to (*Ad hominem argument - criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it.)

... as well a encouraging members to break rule no 5

I do not mind at all folks - fire away. But this serves once more (stopped counting) to reveal Ian's attitude.

Greetings, Pilgrim :)

Good morning, Torben.

Fire away :) Ian, you may want to refresh your memory on the forum rules in regards to (*Ad hominem argument - criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it.) Argumentum ad hominem? Well, such would include behaviours as labelling someone a 'Pharisee', wouldn't it? The fact is that I find you rather intriguing, Torben. Your arrogance I can handle, of course, given that I've been dealing with self-righteous Revivalists for over 15 years. But I've very rarely encountered someone who is so dismissive of the facts, simply because he believes himself to be more informed, knowledgeable and wise than the facts actually warrant. You honestly believe your own press, don't you? I think you actually believe that I haven't addressed your previous arguments, perhaps you honestly think I'm incapable of doing so? I was quite serious when I suggested to you earlier that you overrate your capacity; it seems you gravely underrate mine.

What I'm interested in discovering, Torben, is whether or not you've always been this way. Is what I'm seeing the fruit of your established character? Or has something been 'lost in the recent translation' due to the dissonance that follows rejection from the CAI? I've received several conflicting emails from your former associates. Some reckon I should go harder on you than I have, others suggest that I should give you quite a bit of lattitude. I suppose I'm trying to decide if you're worth the effort of educating, or if you're simply another serial pest who is wasting my time, and on whom I should 'lower boom', once and for all.

I do not mind at all folks - fire away. But this serves once more (stopped counting) to reveal Ian's attitude. My attitude is known well enough, and is something of a constant here. But your attitude is quite different, and what's being demonstrated is quite troubling.

Ian

Good morning Ian,

interesting. I will save myself the ink to list in detail what you have called me, but among them were not insignificant judgements like arrogant brat, not being a christian and worst of all goose.

I see, I will just have to believe you about these emails don't I? Are the unbeknown to me 'associates' of mine those that you happily converse with in approval despite their anonymousity and frequent use of foul language?

No Ian, I think you can answer - you have the IQ and like to play. May I ask (actually sincerely) how you arrive at the conclusion that you have been set to be my teacher? Do I have a say in this? I am willing to learn from anyone who has something to give in the body, but the way you phrase 'educating me' creates a picture of a relationship with you that I am not aware of having entered into.

Ian, I am pointing out your breaking of your own forum's rules.. rules which I though were there to create a certain atmosphere of harmony. I actually really do not mind if you break them or do whatever you understand under 'low boom' to me.

And yes - I still think that you are dead-wrong with your statements and attitude towards people of lesser skill than yourself, regardless of how often you (and some anonymouse posts and invisible emails) shout arrogancy. You are trying so hard to prove that all I tried to demonstrate was wrong, you do not even mind anymore wether you remain objective and fair - now that is how it arrives on my end. You can fire back, or maybe at least think about it for a few seconds before you do so.

Greetings, Pilgrim