Never Trust Anyone

[Kneel B4 Zod]

semi serious post that I don't really have a reason for making:

it seems clear that Brandi is completely messed up and crazy, and manipulative and dishonest.

however, it's a bit disheartening to see so many people react with glee to the news that she is suicidal. if what newhizzle says is true, it really wouldn't surprise me to find out she killed herself. and that would be sad, if her only crime was that she was a crazy manipulative bitch who stole or misused a bunch of money.

[PoppinFresh]

[ QUOTE ]
I am maybe 1/3 through this massive thread but I just wanted to state

BluffThis speaks the real world truth. He does so harshly and without any PC-dress up but what he says is how things are.

Maybe not how they should be and maybe not how you want them, but the way things actually are.

[/ QUOTE ]

This line of thinking is dangerous. It's no different than any other stereotyping

I agree wholeheartedly with T-God FWIW

[Gildwulf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
$100 to the first person who summarizes this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Penis on the back
2. Microwaved turkey meal
3. Blood on the mirror
4. Anal for satellite entry

[/ QUOTE ]

that's actually not bad

[El Diablo]

Jay,

"at what point was it that you broke it off?"

After she lied about winning? No.
After she played 15/30 that he told her not to? No.
After she played 5/10NL without permission? No.
After she lied to him again about winning? No.
After she played 25/50NL without permission? No.
After she changed his password? No.
After she busted his account? No.
After she made him think she was a "scandalous bitch"? No.
After she locked herself in bathroom? No.
After she made him think she was gonna kill herself? No.
After she cut herself? No.
After she possibly attempted suicide? No.
After she wrote "I will fly" in blood on the wall? No.
After she made him lose all respect for her? No.
After she wouldn't let him put his penis in her butt? Yes.

[XTraCey]

[ QUOTE ]
$100 to the first person who summarizes this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Victor]

ya, after reading this thread i agree with bluffthis and im on my way to go rape some hookers.

[samjjones]

A man's got to have his standards.

[PITTM]

[ QUOTE ]
Jay,

"at what point was it that you broke it off?"

After she lied about winning? No.
After she played 15/30 that he told her not to? No.
After she played 5/10NL without permission? No.
After she lied to him again about winning? No.
After she played 25/50NL without permission? No.
After she changed his password? No.
After she busted his account? No.
After she made him think she was a "scandalous bitch"? No.
After she locked herself in bathroom? No.
After she made him think she was gonna kill herself? No.
After she cut herself? No.
After she possibly attempted suicide? No.
After she wrote "I will fly" in blood on the wall? No.
After she made him lose all respect for her? No.
After she wouldn't let him put his penis in her butt? Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

pay the man $100 for the perfect thread summary plz,

rj

[T-God]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bluff, don't be results-oriented now

[/ QUOTE ]


When you have an 80% +EV and you win, that's not being results oriented.

[/ QUOTE ]True, but when in a situation where if you're 20% to call a sexual assualt victim a whore and 80% to get nothing from the situation except some online vindication....

Well, you can see my point

[/ QUOTE ]


The accused is presumed innocent in a criminal trial, not the accuser being truthful except for purposes of prosecution. And known liars aren't even likely to get a prosecutor to take their case even when it's true because they've cried wolf so many times.


BTW, see Sklansky's thread in SMP: Another Way To Explain My Rape/ Prostitute Position

[/ QUOTE ]
Right. But the accuser is not presumed to be lying until proven otherwise. And surely you can see the difference between saying "We shouldn't assume Captain Tom is guilty until we get confirmation" (as some people rightly said earlier in this thread) and the things that you said.

When I read the story, I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. In my mind, the consequences to her of someone believing she's a conniver and being wrong are FAR greater than the consequences to me if I believe she's telling the truth and I get fooled.

[/ QUOTE ]


That's the attitude you're supposed to have if you're the prosecutor. But she made us the jury and the judge of not just this specific story but of her credibility.


I think she's a psycho nutjob and I feel sorry for her and pray she will get some help. But I'm still not going to suspend my brain and believe similar stories from similar lying hustlers in the future. And if they've cried wolf and don't get believe when they're actually telling the truth for once, it's on them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, this makes sense to me. I'm glad you wrote that last part. I may have gotten the wrong impression about your feelings on this from the tone in your previous posts and reading that you do have some sympathy for her (and her obvious problems) is nice to see.

My point is that there are ways to express that you don't believe someone without being confrontational, especially when you have nothing to lose if that person is lying. It's just a matter of tone, I guess.

Knowing enough about certain types of people to not get fooled or hustled by them and being capable of sympathy are not mutually exclusive. At first I thought that you felt they were and I'm glad to see otherwise.

[Slider]

[ QUOTE ]
schwing schwong first though

[/ QUOTE ]

<3 Scrubs Lines