Election Apr 26

[UnSubRocky]

And exactly what threat am I to you or anyone else for that matter.

Oh my fuckin' goodness. Read between the lines. Understand that when someone says "lesser of two evils", they do not necessarily mean that both "evils" are literally evil. So, if I consider someone here a threat to me, I do not consider that my personal safety is in any danger. It is just a figure of speech. I suppose you need me to be more literal with my posts, so that you can spend less time lawyer-interpreting what I say.

[UnSubRocky]

UnSubRocky is clearly very conflicted. That's why he SAYS 1 thing but then does the exact opposite.

I just don't get why he identifies with online toxic narcissistic psychopaths. Across both sister sites.

I do not say that I identify with online toxic narcissist. Nor would I have enough information on people here to say that they are toxic narcissists. It is not like I would be a bad person if I unknowingly started a conversation with a serial killer in real life. I have to respond in kind to the way someone talks to me.

As they will to the way you address them. You have pissed me off with your implied derogatory comments without any evidence at all.

I have not made any implied derogatory comments towards you at all -- ever. If I wanted to piss you off, I would tell it to you directly in no uncertain terms. Me making derogatory remarks to someone would lend little value to its purpose. I just let you guys get caught up in your own self-defeating arguments.

[Aussie]

And exactly what threat am I to you or anyone else for that matter.

Oh my fuckin' goodness. Read between the lines. Understand that when someone says "lesser of two evils", they do not necessarily mean that both "evils" are literally evil. So, if I consider someone here a threat to me, I do not consider that my personal safety is in any danger. It is just a figure of speech. I suppose you need me to be more literal with my posts, so that you can spend less time lawyer-interpreting what I say.

Not at all. I want you to explain the crap you posted about my posts. If there is anything I have posted which is more insane or non sensible or abusive than the best Monk has posted, I want to see it.

What self defeating argument have I mounted?

[UnSubRocky]

And exactly what threat am I to you or anyone else for that matter.

Oh my fuckin' goodness. Read between the lines. Understand that when someone says "lesser of two evils", they do not necessarily mean that both "evils" are literally evil. So, if I consider someone here a threat to me, I do not consider that my personal safety is in any danger. It is just a figure of speech. I suppose you need me to be more literal with my posts, so that you can spend less time lawyer-interpreting what I say.

Not at all. I want you to explain the crap you posted about my posts. If there is anything I have posted which is more insane or non sensible or abusive than the best Monk has posted, I want to see it.

What self defeating argument have I mounted?

The crap about your posts? I had a look through your profile the other day. My surmise is that your are hard pressed for time trying to get your post count ticking over and only want to post a few sentences per reply. The only good post I have seen of yours so far was the recent post about Roe vs Wade decision being overturned. Yet, so far, I have not explored the topic in detail to see where this is going.

Give it a month and I can look at the culture of this forum more adequately.
Or perhaps you and Monk can go at it looking into each other's profiles and finding dirt on each other to expose. But, I do not wish for ancient history to be made known. Only from the last two weeks.

[UnSubRocky]

Has anyone (qualified of course) ever labelled you a psychopath?

I have been labelled a sociopath. Not a psychopath. The closest a person has come to label me psychotic was when a neighbour caught me enraged at her for interfering in my relationships.

[Aussie]

And exactly what threat am I to you or anyone else for that matter.

Oh my fuckin' goodness. Read between the lines. Understand that when someone says "lesser of two evils", they do not necessarily mean that both "evils" are literally evil. So, if I consider someone here a threat to me, I do not consider that my personal safety is in any danger. It is just a figure of speech. I suppose you need me to be more literal with my posts, so that you can spend less time lawyer-interpreting what I say.

Not at all. I want you to explain the crap you posted about my posts. If there is anything I have posted which is more insane or non sensible or abusive than the best Monk has posted, I want to see it.

What self defeating argument have I mounted?

The crap about your posts? I had a look through your profile the other day. My surmise is that your are hard pressed for time trying to get your post count ticking over and only want to post a few sentences per reply. The only good post I have seen of yours so far was the recent post about Roe vs Wade decision being overturned. Yet, so far, I have not explored the topic in detail to see where this is going.

Give it a month and I can look at the culture of this forum more adequately.
Or perhaps you and Monk can go at it looking into each other's profiles and finding dirt on each other to expose. But, I do not wish for ancient history to be made known. Only from the last two weeks.

And that is a very good reason why people get pissed off when someone just turns up out of the blue as you did and in complete ignorance of the 'culture of the forum' seeks to influence it.

I am not interested in a dirt fight with Monk. I can win that every day. What pisses me off is that YOU have tossed dirt directly at me, and when challenged to provide proof, you deflect and default to failure.

I'll leave it at that.

Just remember, next time you have a very personal go at me, make sure your powder is dry as I will not lie down and let you get away with it unchallenged.

[UnSubRocky]

Hang on. Did you not post at OzPol that you were a sociopath?

No. I was alleged by a psychologist not affiliated with Rockhampton Mental Health to possibly be one. Mental health psychologists in Rockhampton have concluded that I am schizophrenic. And I am a high functioninig one, at that.

Link.

I have been classified as a sociopath by actual psychologist.

Your words.

Yep. My words. I also denied that I was diagnosed/declared a sociopath by the Mental Health psychologists in Rockhampton. They are satisfied that the worst-case scenario for my psychology was to say that I was diagnosed schizophrenic. It was the psychologist (and I have to wonder if he was an actually accredited psychologist) not affiliated with local mental health facilities that made a rough estimation based on unfounded allegations made against me.

[Bobby]

There is an error in the vote Tally which doesn't affect the outcome.
Monk's vote for himself was missed.


It should read
Polls have closed. Aussie wins by plenty as follows. First preference votes:

Super Nova......................................Aussie.

Lisa Jones.......................................Aussie.

Bobby............................................Aussie.

John Smith.....................................Aussie.

Nom de Plume.................................Aussie.

Buster Scruggs.................................Aussie.

Baron...........................................Aussie.

Aussie..........................................Aussie.

Achmed........................................Aussie.

That is NINE first preference votes.

Jim Lahey....................................Jovial Monk.

Redneck.....................................Jovial Monk.

Jovial Monk..................................Jovial Monk

UnsubRocky..................................Jovial Monk. VOTE DISALLOWED.

Heartless Felon.............................Jovial Monk.

That is FOUR first preference votes.

Aussie wins 9 - 4.

MAGIC NUMBER IS NOW.....................SEVEN.

[UnSubRocky]

And that is a very good reason why people get pissed off when someone just turns up out of the blue as you did and in complete ignorance of the 'culture of the forum' seeks to influence it.

I am not interested in a dirt fight with Monk. I can win that every day. What pisses me off is that YOU have tossed dirt directly at me, and when challenged to provide proof, you deflect and default to failure.

I'll leave it at that.

Just remember, next time you have a very personal go at me, make sure your powder is dry as I will not lie down and let you get away with it unchallenged.

One question I have to ask you, Aussie, is whether you would have questioned if my vote should count.... if I voted for you. Would you like to entertain that hypothetical?

I did not read any notification that people that recently register at Political Animal have a probationary period where they are ineligible to vote. I thought I had the right to make a vote, straight away.

I figure I have met you before in PublicDebate many years ago.

[Black Orchid]

According to that Aussie won 9/4 = 13. 13 divided by 2 = 6.5 rounded up 0.5 = 7. So the outcome is still the same ie 7. Disallowed votes are not counted.