Fight Club Pub.

reply to post by skeptic1


Lol, sure seems like that doesnt it, In my debate, Im still waiting for S-dogs first post

reply to post by MemoryShock


Funny how .... "This New Group" seems to be the only ones that have had trouble with the rules...

tick
tick
tick
tick



Flame away

reply to post by budski


Happy B-Day, man!

Have an extra one for me.

Originally posted by semperfortis
reply to post by MemoryShock

 

Funny how .... "This New Group" seems to be the only ones that have had trouble with the rules...

It's cause we're just a little smarter and our brains are just a little more flexible than you old-timers'

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
reply to post by skeptic1

 

Lol, sure seems like that doesnt it, In my debate, Im still waiting for S-dogs first post

Well we wouldn't want that: www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by americandingbat


It would seem to me, to be the other way around..

Just an observation mind you...

(And just picking)

Btw, my apologies to my opponent for only using 9999 characters.

I just couldn't find enough to say in order to use my full allotment.

reply to post by semperfortis


But it's you folk who were apparently unable to locate the numerous loopholes and inconsistencies in the rules

I had one more paragraph and a So. question to ask and I was cut off... This is bs. on the counter it gave me plenty of leway, I am so gonna get nailed for this...

*****I forgot to do spell check***************

Vodka.

reply to post by antar


You also messed up the "bold" bb code. Though if you send a U2U to semper or shock they will be happy to help with that.

Vodka is on its way!

reply to post by antar


Somebody say Vodka???




Pick your poison.....

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by antar

 

Somebody say Vodka???

Yes, they said Vodka not crap!

Here you go Antar:







[edit on 19 Feb 2009 by schrodingers dog]

I think I have made the shortest char. post in the history of the FCP --232 and half of them were an and external list

And that's all I'm gonna say about that

reply to post by schrodingers dog


You aren't nice.

:shk:

reply to post by americandingbat

But it's you folk who were apparently unable to locate the numerous loopholes and inconsistencies in the rules

Apparently there aren't any as we have yet to have to change the rules.

Just clarification is all that has been needed..

tick tick tick

More flaming now

reply to post by semperfortis


I thought the rules were pretty self-explanatory.....

...hides...

reply to post by semperfortis


I am sensing a disturbance in the force.

As if someone is trying to be something they're not.

The sweetness is strong within you Mr. Fortis

But not as in the sweetest of all sweeties.

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Btw, my apologies to my opponent for only using 9999 characters.

I just couldn't find enough to say in order to use my full allotment.

Thats ok, you still got another 2 posts

Originally posted by semperfortis
reply to post by americandingbat

 

But it's you folk who were apparently unable to locate the numerous loopholes and inconsistencies in the rules

Apparently there aren't any as we have yet to have to change the rules.

Does that mean you'll take con on my earlier suggestion of a post-tournament debate on "The ATS Debate Forum Source Rules Require A Complete Overhaul?"

I'm not going to make you guys change things in the middle of a tournament, though