Amber - BS Xtra

Sorry am i being thick here?... if Nigma has video of her saying she will get them out if a sailor txts in... and Cosmanaut has video saying she wont go topless... thats well confusing to me.... anyhow i dont realy care if she gets them out.. keeps them in.. or comes round my place and slaps me round the head with them... she is good to watch whatever she does . .

(08-12-2009 15:38 )cosmonaut Wrote:  I've posted 2 clips on Babe Video showing clear denials from Amber that she will go topless. I believe both these clips indicate that Admin was correct in his assertion and that Nigma is the one "telling porkies".

You're joking, right?

"Amber can you go topless?" A: "no, not for the time being anyway"

"but you know, we'll see.."

Very clear denial.. very. I know when I'm trying to be clear I always skirt around the point and contradict myself with a statment that indicates the contrary and gives reason to believe it still may happen.

Interesting how the definitions of clear and denial changes context where required. In this case being saying no with a "well maybe" on the end to one texter after telling every other one, not yet, I'm here until midnight so there's time yet, and umpteen variations of it's too early. And the other being, actually, well maybe.

Trying to refute Admin's initial claims of selective quoting with selective quoting is quite ironic however. Mad props.

To me the word 'no' is a clear denial. Nigma obviously believes otherwise.

This can go on and on! Spoke to Amber a couple of weeks ago and asked the question. "Keep watching you knever know". She is just doing a job. Stringing people along is her job. She,s good at it as all these posts show. Whenever the calls dwindle things will change.

(08-12-2009 16:29 )admiral decker Wrote:  To me the word 'no' is a clear denial. Nigma obviously believes otherwise.

Yes, he does, especially when it's immediately followed by a contradiction. And preceeded by statements to the contrary. And followed by statements to the contrary.

Clear: "No"

Unclear and Contradictory: ""No.. not for the time being anyway"

She didnt specify a timeframe so she wasnt lying lol just you lot of numptys thought she meant tonight not 6 months from now !!!!

(08-12-2009 16:49 )HannahsPet Wrote:  She didnt specify a timeframe so she wasnt lying lol just you lot of numptys thought she meant tonight not 6 months from now !!!!

I think only Nigma thought she meant the same night. To everyone else it was obvious that "not for the time being anyway" meant possibly some time in the future but certainly not tonight.

(08-12-2009 16:40 )Nigma Wrote:  Unclear and Contradictory: ""No.. not for the time being anyway"

You mean it was unclear and contradictory to you Nigma, even though it was perfectly clear to everyone else.

Goal C
Goal J
Goal B

(08-12-2009 16:49 )HannahsPet Wrote:  She didnt specify a timeframe so she wasnt lying lol just you lot of numptys thought she meant tonight not 6 months from now !!!!

You mean except for the timeframe related responses she said earlier in the night. "not yet" "it's too early" and a personal fav, already quoted...

To an early request Amber replied:

"Well you know, Steve. I'm going to be here until midnight so there's a lot of things that can happen between now and then"

Dot dot dot

I can't imagine why viewers wouldn't assume a timeframe of 6 months, 12 months or even years.