Jerry, well said, and I concur with the bulk of your message...But I must ask, did you somehow miss post # 131 ???
..It is a 2 page, rambling, inane response, to a 2 line post, written by one of the most respected guys in the industry,
(Mark Griffin) who only chastised CJ, for being so obnoxious, and argumentative ! :sorry:
SJD
PS..Oh, Mark may have called him a few "expletives deleted" ! (CJ can make any sane person lose their cool)![]()
Re: post #131.
When I got to the second paragraph my eyes started to glass over and I zoned out for a bit. Shook my head tried to refocus.
When I got to paragraph 6 and read ‘Mark’, ‘hidden agenda’ and ‘liar’ in the same thought process I started to reject any further comments out of hand. But I soldiered on.
When I got to the part of the ‘passion for pool’ of an 11 year old I heard sweet violins then it went on to say that the passion would have been destroyed by a fictitious Mark Griffith (sweet violins changed to the discordant note from the Devil Went Down to Georgia and I am quite sure that I caught the scent of brimstone). I screamed at my computer screen “Mark, don’t do it. You will never be proud of yourself if you destroy wee CJ’s passion.”
Tears streamed down my cheeks as I imagined a small CJ, wearing the school boy uniform of the day, walking to the pool room, clutching $2.00 in his little hand, to play pool and then having to walk back. Probably a 3 to 4 mile walk, up-hill both ways.
I am, however, comforted by the fact that I have the utmost faith that Mark will never say those mean things to any 11 year old present or future pool players.
Actually, in all seriousness, I initially skipped most this post #131 until you brought it to my attention. I did initially read to paragraph 2 then went on to post #132 and the rest. I thank you for getting me to go back to this and actually read it as it kind of proved Mark’s point. For my original point about balance to remain valid CJ needs to have two posts sometime in the future that are humorous and interesting although I might settle for one post like this because of little 7 year old CJ.
Thanks for pointing me back to #131, SJD, I would have missed something......well.....unbelievable.
Jerry, well said, and I concur with the bulk of your message...But I must ask, did you somehow miss post # 131 ???
..It is a 2 page, rambling, inane response, to a 2 line post, written by one of the most respected guys in the industry,
(Mark Griffin) who only chastised CJ, for being so obnoxious, and argumentative ! :sorry:
SJD
PS..Oh, Mark may have called him a few "expletives deleted" ! (CJ can make any sane person lose their cool)![]()
Re: post #131.
When I got to the second paragraph my eyes started to glass over and I zoned out for a bit. Shook my head tried to refocus.
When I got to paragraph 6 and read ‘Mark’, ‘hidden agenda’ and ‘liar’ in the same thought process I started to reject any further comments out of hand. But I soldiered on.
When I got to the part of the ‘passion for pool’ of an 11 year old I heard sweet violins then it went on to say that the passion would have been destroyed by a fictitious Mark Griffith (sweet violins changed to the discordant note from the Devil Went Down to Georgia and I am quite sure that I caught the scent of brimstone). I screamed at my computer screen “Mark, don’t do it. You will never be proud of yourself if you destroy wee CJ’s passion.”
Tears streamed down my cheeks as I imagined a small CJ, wearing the school boy uniform of the day, walking to the pool room, clutching $2.00 in his little hand, to play pool and then having to walk back. Probably a 3 to 4 mile walk, up-hill both ways.
I am, however, comforted by the fact that I have the utmost faith that Mark will never say those mean things to any 11 year old present or future pool players.
Actually, in all seriousness, I initially skipped most this post #131 until you brought it to my attention. I did initially read to paragraph 2 then went on to post #132 and the rest. I thank you for getting me to go back to this and actually read it as it kind of proved Mark’s point. For my original point about balance to remain valid CJ needs to have two posts sometime in the future that are humorous and interesting although I might settle for one post like this because of little 7 year old CJ.
Thanks for pointing me back to #131, SJD, I would have missed something......well.....unbelievable.
Re: post #131.
When I got to the second paragraph my eyes started to glass over and I zoned out for a bit. Shook my head tried to refocus.
When I got to paragraph 6 and read ‘Mark’, ‘hidden agenda’ and ‘liar’ in the same thought process I started to reject any further comments out of hand. But I soldiered on.
When I got to the part of the ‘passion for pool’ of an 11 year old I heard sweet violins then it went on to say that the passion would have been destroyed by a fictitious Mark Griffith (sweet violins changed to the discordant note from the Devil Went Down to Georgia and I am quite sure that I caught the scent of brimstone). I screamed at my computer screen “Mark, don’t do it. You will never be proud of yourself if you destroy wee CJ’s passion.”
Tears streamed down my cheeks as I imagined a small CJ, wearing the school boy uniform of the day, walking to the pool room, clutching $2.00 in his little hand, to play pool and then having to walk back. Probably a 3 to 4 mile walk, up-hill both ways.
I am, however, comforted by the fact that I have the utmost faith that Mark will never say those mean things to any 11 year old present or future pool players.
Actually, in all seriousness, I initially skipped most this post #131 until you brought it to my attention. I did initially read to paragraph 2 then went on to post #132 and the rest. I thank you for getting me to go back to this and actually read it as it kind of proved Mark’s point. For my original point about balance to remain valid CJ needs to have two posts sometime in the future that are humorous and interesting although I might settle for one post like this because of little 7 year old CJ.
Thanks for pointing me back to #131, SJD, I would have missed something......well.....unbelievable.
I read post like yours, and I just sit here wondering what forum you are talking about. Because it sure isn't this one! Wit and kindness?? Do you even read his posts?? He's not witty at all, and anything but kind. Sometimes it really bothers and amazes me that some people are so messed up in their thinking that they actually think some things are good that bother the majority of people.
As far as Barton, you think he cracked. All he did is respond in actual words, not just pictures that he found on the net somewhere. CJ isn't capable of the word fest that Barton used to put up. Bartons posts at least made sense.
OMG!!!!
Your post is the funniest sh*& I have ever read in my life!!
The Devil went to northern Missouri and he was looking for a soul to steal, he was in a bind, he was way behind and willing to make a deal - he saw a 7 year old CJ with a cue playing pool, jumped up the table and said "you're an idiot and a fool" - you'll never amount to anything, why are you trying, if you do make any pool DVDS, rest assured, I'M NOT BUYING. LMAO!!!
:rotflmao1::yeah::clapping::
CJ,
You've got the fan club hanging on every word you post! Don't make excuses for what you do. You don't owe anybody an explanation. You're in Dallas, so they know where to find you and come out from behind their keyboard.
A few noted their displeasure with you with class in this thread. Just a few. I want to thank those few. The rest need to stop stalking CJ, really.
It's the same 6-8 posters who trash talk every time. You follow the guy around and bait him, trying to get a rise out of him. If you want to debate with him, post like SJD or HU and show some respect. You think he reads your bashing posts and takes your advice? A page more is all I give this thread before it's removed, too.
Best,
Mike.
I read post like yours, and I just sit here wondering what forum you are talking about. Because it sure isn't this one! Wit and kindness?? Do you even read his posts?? He's not witty at all, and anything but kind. Sometimes it really bothers and amazes me that some people are so messed up in their thinking that they actually think some things are good that bother the majority of people.
As far as Barton, you think he cracked. All he did is respond in actual words, not just pictures that he found on the net somewhere. CJ isn't capable of the word fest that Barton used to put up. Bartons posts at least made sense.
Whiffer...I would like to be the first, to nominate you for post of the decade..(if there is such a thing)... Your humorous remarks are priceless..You missed your calling, you could have been 'chief comedy writer' for SNL, or Jay Leno ! :thumbup:
SJD
PS..By the way, don't feel bad, I have to read ALL of CJ's posts, in about nine installments myself...But the content is just so riveting !..But when you reach my age, I almost get a woody, listening to Rosie O'Donnell's jokes !..
View attachment 369429
Gotta agree on both counts with Neil. CJ is not witty or kind in the least.
In John's case... I have a lot of crazies on Ignore but never John, because in spite of his faults he was articulate, honest, and passionate. His posts had their own internal logic. CJ couldn't find logic if you spotted him if A equal B and B equal C.
Lou Figueroa
CJ,
It's the same 6-8 posters who trash talk every time. You follow the guy around and bait him, trying to get a rise out of him. If you want to debate with him, post like SJD or HU and show some respect. You think he reads your bashing posts and takes your advice? A page more is all I give this thread before it's removed, too.
Best,
Mike.
hmmmm, I call BS.
You have over 9,000 posts in four and a half years. That would be at least five posts a day, average ...
CJ joined in May, 2010, posted 21 times over the following two months, then did not post at all (at least in threads that have survived) for over 2 years. So his flood of over 9,000 posts has really come in less than 2 ½ years (rather than 4 ½). He has averaged about 10.4 posts per day in that period.
But in his post #131 (to which you were responding), despite his wording, I think his reference was actually to threads rather than posts.