Fray Bentos is God! wrote:I am not Wendy.
"Only the true Wendy would deny his own Wendyness".
He is the messiah!
Fray Bentos is God! wrote:I am not Wendy.
Dynamo Zuffle wrote:Fray Bentos is God! wrote:I am not Wendy.
Will this turn into a Spartacus moment where people denounce being Wendy?
Fray Bentos is God! wrote:Dynamo Zuffle wrote:Fray Bentos is God! wrote:I am not Wendy.
Will this turn into a Spartacus moment where people denounce being Wendy?
I'd hoped someone would defend me, obviously not :(
Tay me though.
Whitti Steve wrote:Fray Bentos is God! wrote:Dynamo Zuffle wrote:Fray Bentos is God! wrote:I am not Wendy.
Will this turn into a Spartacus moment where people denounce being Wendy?
I'd hoped someone would defend me, obviously not :(
Tay me though.
We know, yow ay clever enough :mrgreen:
Fray Bentos is God! wrote:Whitti Steve wrote:Fray Bentos is God! wrote:Dynamo Zuffle wrote:Fray Bentos is God! wrote:I am not Wendy.
Will this turn into a Spartacus moment where people denounce being Wendy?
I'd hoped someone would defend me, obviously not :(
Tay me though.
We know, yow ay clever enough :mrgreen:
I'm clever enough to be accused by a man 12,000 miles away :P
Cleverer than Sheffyboo too.
cyclothymic wrote:Sheff
I know you are right!
I know you are sure you are right!
But, hypothetically speaking, if you are not then you are:
1) accusing an innocent poster of things they have not done
2) causing a large risk of physical assult to the poster, as there is a fair degree of venom towards the real WM
3) maybe forcing the poster from UTS for good
4) causing the poster to lose friends, respect and their part in the UTS social scene
5) intimidating an innocent poster
6) causing a great degree of upset to an innocent person
I just wonder, hypothetically speaking of course because you are right, what you think should be done to someone who carries out points 1- 6 above against an innocent poster. Is it covered in the AUP I wonder? Maybe because this is a web-board you feel such behaviour is allowed? Maybe you are right? Or maybe the innocent poster might be owed a fair degree of compensation, one way or another, for the slander?
Like I say - please answer this hypothetically because you are absolutely sure you are right aren’t you?
saddlerken wrote:Sheff, dont let cyclo convince you not to say anything please
No one would cave Wendys face in before knowing for certain it was them
saddlerken wrote:Sheff, dont let cyclo convince you not to say anything please
No one would cave Wendys face in before knowing for certain it was them
saddlerken wrote:Sheff, dont let cyclo convince you not to say anything please
No one would cave Wendys face in before knowing for certain it was them
Cheesebag wrote:HOW MANY FRIGGIN TIMES???????
Wendy Mumford is NOT a regular poster by any other name apart from the usual banned aliases....
He Is not....
Tape
Cheesebag
Fray
MMF
Saigon
Exile
Kiansmom
Cyclo/Cariad
Cully
He is/has been
Eurobaz
Eurodaz
Flower Petal Parade
Shoe Cakey
Mr poo poo
Poo poo Mr
Timothy Claypole.
amongst others.
Comprende? :D
saddlerken wrote:Sheff, dont let cyclo convince you not to say anything please
No one would cave Wendys face in before knowing for certain it was them
Whitti Steve wrote:stafflers wrote:Is the anonymous chap's real name D**** F******?
Do I win £100?
I don't care... just glad you are back. Please stay.
stafflers wrote:Whitti Steve wrote:stafflers wrote:Is the anonymous chap's real name D**** F******?
Do I win £100?
I don't care... just glad you are back. Please stay.
Thank you for your warm welcome. But I don't think everybody would be glad if I became a regular user on here - some people are quite happy that I zipped off!
I may hang around, but the parole has been good - it's amazing the amount of time you get off with good behaviour (or bad behaviour)!
Somebody sent me a message about this thread so I came to have a look.
All this unmasking of people is great isn't it. I asked Cully to come around and give me some lessons in how to stalk people and track them down. It's very productive. Some of these alter-egos are very good, but there are those who exist only for nefarious purposes. You have to be very careful not to cross the line and start impersonating people.
Morty wrote:So having waded through 400-odd posts we've came to the following summary:-
1) Everyone (well some!) thought WM was cyclo - but its not!
2) Cheese and Sheff know who it but won't tell anyone. (hmmm...does this mean Cheese = Sheff!?? :twisted: )
3) All other alter-egos are Metfan.
So is it Bill Gates, Tone!? :)
I love UTS! :lol:
Cheesebag wrote:So Sheff/Moma will undoubtedly say it is........
Cheesebag/Fray Bentos/Metfan/MMF/Exile/CycloCariad
Delete as applicable.... :lol:
Morty wrote:So having waded through 400-odd posts we've came to the following summary:-
1) Everyone (well some!) thought WM was cyclo - but its not!
2) Cheese and Sheff know who it but won't tell anyone. (hmmm...does this mean Cheese = Sheff!?? :twisted: )
3) All other alter-egos are Metfan.
So is it Bill Gates, Tone!? :)
I love UTS! :lol:
Morty wrote:On page 7 of 15:-Cheesebag wrote:So Sheff/Moma will undoubtedly say it is........
Cheesebag/Fray Bentos/Metfan/MMF/Exile/CycloCariad
Delete as applicable.... :lol:
See cyclo, Cheese defintely reckons its you!! ;-)
Whitti Steve wrote:I liked Santa... whatever happened to him?
tape66 wrote:Whitti Steve wrote:I liked Santa... whatever happened to him?
Who gives a toss ? :wink: :wink: :D
cyclothymic wrote:Sheff
I know you are right!
I know you are sure you are right!
But, hypothetically speaking, if you are not then you are:
1) accusing an innocent poster of things they have not done
2) causing a large risk of physical assult to the poster, as there is a fair degree of venom towards the real WM
3) maybe forcing the poster from UTS for good
4) causing the poster to lose friends, respect and their part in the UTS social scene
5) intimidating an innocent poster
6) causing a great degree of upset to an innocent person
I just wonder, hypothetically speaking of course because you are right, what you think should be done to someone who carries out points 1- 6 above against an innocent poster. Is it covered in the AUP I wonder? Maybe because this is a web-board you feel such behaviour is allowed? Maybe you are right? Or maybe the innocent poster might be owed a fair degree of compensation, one way or another, for the slander?
Like I say - please answer this hypothetically because you are absolutely sure you are right aren’t you?
SheffieldSaddler wrote:cyclothymic wrote:Sheff
I know you are right!
I know you are sure you are right!
But, hypothetically speaking, if you are not then you are:
1) accusing an innocent poster of things they have not done
2) causing a large risk of physical assult to the poster, as there is a fair degree of venom towards the real WM
3) maybe forcing the poster from UTS for good
4) causing the poster to lose friends, respect and their part in the UTS social scene
5) intimidating an innocent poster
6) causing a great degree of upset to an innocent person
I just wonder, hypothetically speaking of course because you are right, what you think should be done to someone who carries out points 1- 6 above against an innocent poster. Is it covered in the AUP I wonder? Maybe because this is a web-board you feel such behaviour is allowed? Maybe you are right? Or maybe the innocent poster might be owed a fair degree of compensation, one way or another, for the slander?
Like I say - please answer this hypothetically because you are absolutely sure you are right aren’t you?
Have you been on the wine or something?
Show me your evidence to points 1-6 you mad man.
Biggest load of rubbish I have read since WM.
:lol:
Fray Bentos is God! wrote:Doc, you asked him to think, what else did you expect?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests