Attention Moderators
- Thread starter stan shuffett
- Start date
DTL's posting history for today. 66.66% of a trolling nature.
Attention Moderators
Views: 1,590
Posted By DTL
Edit made to previous post. JK....... like I...
Edit made to previous post. JK....... like I said, says it all.
Forum: Wanted Today, 09:44 PM
Replies: 0
Dufferin 1-Piece Commercial Cue with Ebony butt
Views: 7
Posted By DTL
Dufferin 1-Piece Commercial Cue with Ebony butt
Where can I find these?.......see title. The house cue type.
Forum: Aiming Conversation Today, 09:35 PM
Replies: 61
Attention Moderators
Views: 1,590
Posted By DTL
This says it all!
Sunday 6 Mar 2016, ENGLISH!'s posting history:
1205 am JS thread
0123 am JS thread
0849 am JS thread
0928 am JS thread
1005 am JS thread
1010 am DAM thread
1101 am JS thread
1142 am ...
Attention Moderators
Views: 1,590
Posted By DTL
Edit made to previous post. JK....... like I...
Edit made to previous post. JK....... like I said, says it all.
Forum: Wanted Today, 09:44 PM
Replies: 0
Dufferin 1-Piece Commercial Cue with Ebony butt
Views: 7
Posted By DTL
Dufferin 1-Piece Commercial Cue with Ebony butt
Where can I find these?.......see title. The house cue type.
Forum: Aiming Conversation Today, 09:35 PM
Replies: 61
Attention Moderators
Views: 1,590
Posted By DTL
This says it all!
Sunday 6 Mar 2016, ENGLISH!'s posting history:
1205 am JS thread
0123 am JS thread
0849 am JS thread
0928 am JS thread
1005 am JS thread
1010 am DAM thread
1101 am JS thread
1142 am ...
You got me scratching my head here, WTH...lol
:nono: Something ain't jiving....well.... I mean.........Aaaaaaa........Mmmmmmm.
I guess I'm speechless.
Is this site kind of a porn site too?? lol I didn't no that was something you would post here...and so much . Crazy.
I'm sorry, guess I shouldn't judge.
You got me scratching my head here, WTH...lol
:nono: Something ain't jiving....well.... I mean.........Aaaaaaa........Mmmmmmm.
I guess I'm speechless.
Is this site kind of a porn site too?? lol I didn't no that was something you would post here...and so much . Crazy.
I'm sorry, guess I shouldn't judge.
No Anthony,
That is just DTL's mis-characterizations. He'll slither into the lowest of gutters like suggesting that CJ & I had a homosexual encounter & that am a child molester.
Do you think that Mike & Jerry would allow ANY pornographic material to be posted on their site?
All because I am pointing out that the description of his pool god's aiming method is inaccurate.
You know how they are.
Oh, let me post my marriage license dated 1981 ... JUST FOR YOU.
I'm willing to take the forum heat from the likes of you guys if just one individual is kept from being mislead by the inaccurate description.
I suggest that if ANYONE thinks that you are incapable of not telling the truth that they read my posts in the instructor forum & main forum.
You've shown many many times now that you have absolutely no regard for the truth.
Is that really your wife or...
No... I won't slither into the filthy gutter where you so often go...
but I will say that I hope that you do not have any children until you gain some good character... that is, if you ever do.
Last edited:
Reporting what?
It was Mike that gave you the 'vacation'. I think it should have been a permanent one for the totally untrue & disgusting thing that you suggested about me.
Now you're suggesting that there is pornographic material on his & Jerry's site.
If I get the boot for telling the truth, then so be it. Not that I want it, but there is only so much disgusting untrue crap that I'm willing to take from the likes of you.
Last edited:
Do you even know what a sexual image is?
Even a fully nude male or female is not a sexual image & there is none of that, complete nudity, that is shown or tolerated on this site.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Michael Angelo's statue of the partially nude "Venus" is NOT pornographic.
And only a smut monger sees smut where none exists.
It seems that you & the OP want to tell Mike & Jerry how to run THEIR site.
Last edited:
Full Definition of pornography
1
: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3
: the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction <the pornography of violence>
None of that posted has been posted by me on any other member.
Mike & Jerry would not allow it. None my posts in any of those NPR threads has ever been removed by management but some, a few, by other members have been removed
As I said, Mike Jerry would not pornographic material to be posted.
The pictures that I & many others have posted are of beautiful women intended as "Eye Candy" as they are pleasing to the eye in both body & face.
Michael Angelo's statue of "Venus" is NOT pornographic.
This should be the Ultimate Objective Indicator that there is no rational logical explanation that will ever be forth coming to support the inaccurate description that CTE is 'an objective aiming method'.
They are now 'attacking' how Mike & Jerry run their site in order to try to get the selective censorship that they want.
1
: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3
: the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction <the pornography of violence>
None of that posted has been posted by me on any other member.
Mike & Jerry would not allow it. None my posts in any of those NPR threads has ever been removed by management but some, a few, by other members have been removed
As I said, Mike Jerry would not pornographic material to be posted.
The pictures that I & many others have posted are of beautiful women intended as "Eye Candy" as they are pleasing to the eye in both body & face.
Michael Angelo's statue of "Venus" is NOT pornographic.
This should be the Ultimate Objective Indicator that there is no rational logical explanation that will ever be forth coming to support the inaccurate description that CTE is 'an objective aiming method'.
They are now 'attacking' how Mike & Jerry run their site in order to try to get the selective censorship that they want.
You know nothing about me other than what I have revealed. You have nothing to base saying that I, unlike you, am not a pool player.
I'm 62, had a small eye accident & have a ruptured disc in my back & have since put on some weight. I've been playing pool for nearly 50 years. I started playing one pocket less than 8 months ago & I played for 5 hours Friday & am beating guys that have played the game for multiple decades & I'm playing them even. A gentleman that I played Friday was a semi pro in his prime & I beat him 2 of 5 & had him on the ropes when he quit. I should have won 4 of 5 but rattled what would have been my winner both times on 3 7/8" pockets on a 9' Diamond table.
I've played sports & coached sports. I know about bio- mechanics too & I know physics.
I've helped a considerable amount of individuals here on this site & my rep page is full of green except for an occasion red from an odd ball.
One of the differences between you & me is that I have NEVER implied or suggested that any fellow member here was a child molester.
What you did was disgusting & for that IMO you should have gotten way more than a couple of weeks & I would say the same thing if you had implied that about any other member.
When I saw you back that soon I thought it must have been a typographical error & that it would be corrected to the 2 years. You're lucky to be here IMO.
Perhaps I am too. But all I am doing is telling the truth & not suggesting the disgusting & immoral thing that you did.
I can forgive, but I sometimes have a very difficult time in forgetting.
You remind me with every ill will post that you make toward me.
You did it again tonight.
But I would not laugh if you get a ban of any kind. I'd Pray for you just like I have been. You worry me more than any other member.
So... you made 3 posts & 2 of them were of the T kind.
That's 66% of your posts that were of the T kind.
Do the same tomorrow & the day after & soon you will be 40 of 60 for 66% of the T kind.
How about if I say that about 95+% of your posts involving me are of the T kind.
Would that suit you better?
Last edited: