"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
All 6 of you? LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!! You're harder to get rid of than bedbugs! LMAO I'd call it well informed. Passionate even LMAO @Kad. You're the one hounding this topic. LMAO
"Vindication!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Yea, right...
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
You got angry at the OP for having an opinion that differed from yours (though you haven't seen the show yet). You gave your opinion that this makes the OP a troll; everyone who responded seems to have disagreed with that and said so. It's how message boards work.
I called out the troll for trolling BWW and was fine with leaving it at that.
Except you didn't because the person you were attacking wasn't trolling.
You all ganged up on me for giving my honest opinion.
No. People were sick of you attacking someone for absolutely no reason. But then we all found your insane hypocrisy and total lack of self-awareness hilarious.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
We 'ganged up' on you, because you attacked a poster that did nothing wrong. (Except not praise your beloved Clay Aiken.)
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
and ironically, that search that Reg recommended led me to a post from you defending the fact that people should be able to post any review as long as they'd seen the show. You went on to affirm that reviews are not only valid if you agree with them.
"a post from you defending the fact that people should be able to post any review as long as they'd seen the show"
I'm sure next Mikers will try to claim I haven't seen the show. But I'm prepared for that, as I have a photo of my ticket and program that I posted elsewhere for my friends to see. :)
and ironically, that search that Reg recommended led me to a post from you defending the fact that people should be able to post any review as long as they'd seen the show. You went on to affirm that reviews are not only valid if you agree with them. ------------------------------------------------------- I agree with me but it is different if the "review" is only posted to cause an emotional reaction. That is called trolling.
How was my review posted to cause an emotional reaction? If I had said the performance was perfect, would I have still been a troll because it happened to be my first post? Never mind that it would have been completely dishonest...