Thread: 1807
View Single Post
  #16  
Old 22-01-2015, 11:54 PM
omnia omnia is offline
Samster
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: On a Supernova
Posts: 4,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
My Reputation: Points: 2223 / Power: 23
omnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond reputeomnia has a reputation beyond repute
Wink Facts...Opinions...Agendas...

1)...Genuine No Agenda Sharing frs r always welcum in SBF...good, bad or otherwise it does not matter....this has been my consistent position all along in SBF...

Fact : I hv disclosed all current frs on this Ling Ling, good, bad or otherwise...in fact i am also going to add on the latest comment on Ling Ling by another samster in my next post...

Query: Once again who r these "bona fide samsters" n who decides who r "bona fide samsters" as raised by Max_Priest?...also why does Max_Priest need to raise the issue of "bona fide samsters" in the first place?

2)...Max_Priest confuses fact wif opinion on this one...it is clearly only his opinion n not a fact...moreover, since when must a samster's nick be mentioned as a prerequisite for making a post in SBF?...Max_Priest now appears to be creating his own set of rules for SBF?!...this is a Public Forum n last i checked only Sammyboy calls the shots...furthermore, it is noteworthy that Max_Priest has resorted to bold highlights, which appears to indicate that it is actually he who is defensive, uptight and feeling guilty conscience(sic)!...

3)...Max_Priest is misconceived on this one...pot calling the kettle black relates to his general behaviour n attitude taken in this thread where he tries(but miserably fails) to put me in a negative light whereas he himself has performed in such a negative manner...see my abv posts for more details...

Fact: I repeat what i said in 1) abv...

4)...Max_Priest confuses fact wif opinion on this one...it is clearly only his opinion n not a fact...since when is creating a thread for a GL House(in this case 1807) that does not hv a previous thread created, necessarily a promotion agenda?...same applies to frs for GL mms per se...i stand corrected but i thought SBF was a place to share info/frs and not a place for promotion agendas?...

I also note wif amusement that my consistent position re Genuine No Agenda Sharing has to quote Max_Priest's apparent good buddy" tingled[" Max_Priest's nerve!!...

Fact:...Max_Priestrepeatedly n aggressively promotes his apparent fav GL mms in SBF...i stand corrected but I dont think there is any other samster who conducts himself in such a shameless n disingenuous manner...

Max_Priest is also being disingenuous when he says "Honestly I myself also have this intent to help the WLs "!...i wonder is Max_Priest actually "helping" himself to attain his own benefits to the detriment of the GL mms instead?...It is perhaps noteworthy that Max_Priest has thus far declined to answer whether the GL mms he writes about, know about his SBF persona n how, when n why they got to know about this in the first place?.....

Fact:...I never set up a thread specifically to promote Ling Ling[....does a Ling Ling thread purportedly created by me as alleged by Max_Priest exist?...no...this thread that i created is for 1807(there was no previous thread on 1807)...is Ling Ling fm 1807?...yes...so naturally all frs on Ling Ling sld be placed in this thread, right!...ironically i note Max_Priest himself requesting for other/more frs on Ling Ling in this v same thread!!...moreover i did the samething for 2033(creating a thread n compiling all the relevant frs), curiously enuff i did not hear any complaints in tat thread?!...

Fact:...Nato17 stated thatLing Ling is his kind of gal in response to Nat28's fr on Ling Ling...http://sammy.services/showpos...postcount=9637...all i did was highlight this apparent rare endorsement by Nato17, tongue in cheek style... http://sammy.services/showpos...ount=662...now it appears that only a cunning sly person like Max_Priest wif his own sinister promotion agenda wld translate this, wrongly n falsely i sld add, into i" [/I]tried to capitalize on Nato's unqiue preference for certain type of women to indirectly sell Ling Ling[/I]"?!...

5)...i repeat 1) - 4) abv...

6)...i repeat 4) abv...u r merely just showing to all in SBF what a cunning, sly, sinister person u r Max_Priest, by taking such a position...this is yr personality not mine...

Fact:...Man Man(16W06) does indeed hv fake enhanced boobs...

Fact:...Max_Priest has repeatedly n aggressively promoted Man Man(16W06) in SBF...i stand corrected but i dont think any other samster has done likewise...

Oh n Max_Priest now appears to be totally contradicting himself!...First he says"unlike Omnia, I embrace criticism and/or comments be it bad or good one. The issues on Man Man's tits (@another thread) and Ling Ling (in this thread) are pertinent examples"...if that is the case, why is it that now you "cannot accept negative remarks against the WL(Man Man) or query the WL(Man Man) whom you promote and/or promoted"?....

Yes indeed there is definitely more to this than meets the eye...
Query: Whose eyes?!