The UK Babe Channels Forum

(11-01-2015 17:57 )bigfatpiggyporker Wrote: [ -> ]So, you're not willing to talk to the mods about sending the picture you sent biggles to end this once and for all?

I'm betting no. Any takers?

I don't know what more can be done.

It's a Shame "ValerieC" has gone as I wanted to ask them about their use of the below terms;

(11-01-2015 17:56 )ValerieC Wrote: [ -> ]I have found it amusing to what levels you seem to want to project, control and significantly judge others on this forum.

(11-01-2015 05:08 )ValerieC Wrote: [ -> ]I'll go elsewhere and you can continue your psychological projection and rejection.

(30-12-2014 19:21 )ValerieC Wrote: [ -> ]Two words for you Mr, psychological projection. We'll see what Biggles has to say won't we. Goof.

I wanted to know if they are a student of Freudian psychology, and whether they feel Freud misinterpreted Fliess' original concept, happy with the current psychoanalytic definition or whether they are more Jungian in opinion (Projection wikipedia page here)

Otherwise, to quote the Princess Bride to ValerieC:

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

(11-01-2015 18:23 )setter1000 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm betting no. Any takers?
I don't know what more can be done.

Well, I did ask Biggles whether he could ask ValerieC whether she would be happy for the mods to see the picture she (apparently) sent him and seeing as Biggles says it's verifiable, if he's still got the image, either in a PM or elsewhere, he could contact the mods etc.

(10-01-2015 17:55 )bigfatpiggyporker Wrote: [ -> ]Biggles, if you still have the picture, would ValerieC be happy with one of the mods seeing it, being a neutral party to look at the picture to end this once and for all?

Unfortunately, we've heard from him as yet since yesterday, so that's really the last chance, as I see it, to end this debate.

(11-01-2015 18:38 )bigfatpiggyporker Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-01-2015 18:23 )setter1000 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm betting no. Any takers?
I don't know what more can be done.

Well, I did ask Biggles whether he could ask ValerieC whether she would be happy for the mods to see the picture she (apparently) sent him and seeing as Biggles says it's verifiable, if he's still got the image, either in a PM or elsewhere, he could contact the mods etc.

(10-01-2015 17:55 )bigfatpiggyporker Wrote: [ -> ]Biggles, if you still have the picture, would ValerieC be happy with one of the mods seeing it, being a neutral party to look at the picture to end this once and for all?

Unfortunately, we've heard from him as yet since yesterday, so that's really the last chance, as I see it, to end this debate.

So no Hurrah for biggles than
They say you should never meet your boy hood Hero's

(11-01-2015 18:32 )bigfatpiggyporker Wrote: [ -> ]Otherwise, to quote the Princess Bride to ValerieC:

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

A couple of links for you........

http://www.dailywritingtips.com/big-word...dont-they/

http://www.collisiondetection.net/mt/arc...ng_big.php

I like the way that someone comes here looking to hook up with guys, and whose profile link points to them talking about being banged in front of their husband, and acting out incest fantasies, and is willing to accomodate despite having two daughters living at home ... and then flounces off trying to take the moral high ground!
Classy

Thank you one and all.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record,

Biggles, if you still have the picture, could one of the mods see it ? They would be a neutral party to look at the picture to end this once and for all?

I take it that's a no than biggles