Forum Topic

Our Troll

is now posting on Chiswick W4 under the name of Lisa Smith, just in case anyone was missing her!

Susan Kelly ● 6543d37 Comments

I thought I sensed a similarity in style and content but was not certain enough to say so there - also thought posting there just encourages her.

Sara Nathan ● 6543d

Quite. I'm not responding to any of her posts. But the pattern is clear: statement that posters are boring; then segue into sexual stuff. She may find she's bitten off more than she can chew on W4, mind!

Susan Kelly ● 6543d

Never found out whether she sp*t or sw*ll*wed, did we?

Alan Brainsby ● 6543d

Huh?

Susan Kelly ● 6543d

Oh God!I had hoped that the statement was self-evident.Perhaps one of the ladies on the forum could explain!Failing that, one of the gentlemen.As a last resort I will do so, but do not wish to be labelled a Russell Brand or Jonathan Ross for bad taste (no pun intended)!

Alan Brainsby ● 6543d

Please don't.Lucky those in blissful ignorance and long may they remain so.No more "harm and offence" needed. I preferred it when it was "taste and decency" but I don't suppose that would appeal to you.

Sara Nathan ● 6543d

Lots of things don't appeal to me, including arrogance.

Alan Brainsby ● 6543d

Oh, I see it now. Since neither word is offensive, per se, I don't see the point of astericking them out.

Susan Kelly ● 6543d

Neither word is offensive, like most others, is offensive by itself.However in the context of the phrase stated there may be cause for embarrassment or offence.  Not knowing who might be reading these posts, including age range, I prefer to err on the side of politeness.I am not prudish but I accept that others may be. Whether they are it is not going to stop me from stating certain things which others may disagree with.There is a difference between outright rudeness/offence which affects everybody and surmised rudeness/offence which is a matter of personal opinion.Some individuals would do well to understand that concept.On a lighter note the phrase "Do you sp.....?" is probably the best chat-up line going as it immediately establishes the likely outcome of an encounter.

Alan Brainsby ● 6543d

''On a lighter note the phrase "Do you sp.....?" is probably the best chat-up line going as it immediately establishes the likely outcome of an encounter.''No it isn't. It identifies the person asking the question as puerile and lacking in conversational skills. And furthermore, if that's the thought at the forefront of their mind - probably extremely selfish in the bed dept and therefore not worth getting to know - whether you're up for a one night stand or not.

Maggie Anderson ● 6543d

In which case, from the point of view of the person asked, it probably is the best chat-up line.

Alan Brainsby ● 6543d

Does it ever work?And would you want to do whatever with someone for whom it did?

Sara Nathan ● 6542d

Surprisingly, perhaps, I've never used the line leaving it to my personal charm and natural magnetism to accomplish the desired result.However, looking back at my life I can think of several occasions where I could have used it with devastating effect. Sadly those opportunities will never arise again.Some of my friends have had mixed success and a cousin always seemed to use it as his chat-up line. This cousin did have great success but I rather think it was down to his wealth and influence. Sadly the world he inhabited was drug-fuelled so I think he could have said nothing and still pulled.Regarding whether one would act on a positive answer; personally I would. That is based on the premise that I would never pose the question to a stranger.

Alan Brainsby ● 6542d

Isn't the whole point of first chat-up lines to introduce yourself to a - potentially bonkable - stranger?

Sara Nathan ● 6542d

I going through a period of self discovery thanks to this Forum.I went to bed last night cosy with the knowledge that I'd been called a "Liberal Lovie" by someone that I can't think of anyone I'd rather have been called that by.I thought about it and I have to agree I probably am one,that's good!Today I switch to and catch up with the gossip,only to find that I'm a prude as well,great I can live with that!Wonder what tomorrow will bring?

Tony Wood ● 6542d

"it probably is the best chat-up line" Alan,

Hugh Telford ● 6542d

LOL!At least humour is alive and well in Ealing.

Alan Brainsby ● 6542d

Good point Sara.I've always liked to know the provenance a potential companion before advancing, but often one can tell by observation - body language, friends, speech, etc.I suppose I'll be called sexist but I've usually let the girl do the chat. To be honest it's more how than what is said.  I suppose in the end it's a bit like buying a car. One can read good, and bad, reviews of the same car but until one's had a test drive one doesn't know what it is really capable of.In case that sounds sexist it is equally true for both sexes.

Alan Brainsby ● 6542d

How do you know it is equally true?Have you tried both sexes?I can't believe I just asked that...maybe corrupted by this very forum!

Sara Nathan ● 6542d

Maybe it's you that's just corrupted the forum! :)I must admit my English could have been a little clearer.What I meant was although most men think they are God's gift to women it's the reviews by women which are the most revealing.

Alan Brainsby ● 6542d

She's already been asked for verification on W4. Bye, bye Loosa.

Susan Kelly ● 6542d

Sara, just realized I'd hadn't answered you question.Apologies.No, I've never had a non-heterosexual encounter. I was too busy in my youth satisfying the needs of young ladies from local schools, especially Habs, nurses' homes, including Hammersmith, Q Charlotte's, The Middlesex, and Ealing South Young Conservatives. This all came to an abrupt end when I met my wife-to-be. So I never had time to get round to the boys.My apologies to all those ladies born between 1946 and 1951 that I missed!

Alan Brainsby ● 6542d

Phew - safe by a good five years!

Sara Nathan ● 6542d

Which one of us? :)Perhaps that should remain a mystery...

Alan Brainsby ● 6542d

Both?

Sara Nathan ● 6542d

"I thought I sensed a similarity in style and content but was not certain enough to say so there - also thought posting there just encourages her."Just let me know; Have the pair of you set yourselves up as the official censors, for the forums you are not too slow in contributing to yourselves, Nice couple of individuals you come across as. "Don't do as I do, do as I/we say", seems to me to be the order of the day?

Account suspended ● 6541d

Alas, we'll never know!

Alan Brainsby ● 6541d

"I treasured this forum for its charm and inconsequental but friendly banter - it used to be the really good-natured forum."Here is an example of the kind of stuff that typifies "it's charm and good nature" is it? The sheer hypocrisy of you two is breath taking.........Yeah! sounds friendly to me

Account suspended ● 6541d

"She's already been asked for verification on W4. Bye, bye Loosa."This is the example of a Gentle Ealing, and she had the cheek to ask if I had talen my medication.......I'll leave others to judge!

Account suspended ● 6541d

I don't know why I'm bothering to respond to this, AMJA, but here goes: I'm not afraid to express my opinions, using my real name. The troll in question joins the forums under an assumed name, abuses other forum users, then quickly posts long rants of a sexual or scatalogical nature. If you'd care to check out her (even assuming it is a woman) most recent posts on W4, you'll find they consist largely of threats to urinate on people's gardens. This may well be your idea of reasoned debate, or even humour, but it isn't mine.I have not censored anyone, as you allege. The moderators have been swift to act against him/her this time, which they weren't when s/he made a nuisance of her/himself on W5 a few weeks ago. Maybe some forum users have complained, although I have not done so myself.Do you even know the meaning of the word hypocrisy? Because you don't seem to apply it very sensibly.That's my last word on the subject. I shall not bother to respond to any more nonsense of yours.Ta ta.

Susan Kelly ● 6541d

I had to look 'scatalogical' up - well said.  :-)

Sarah Felstead ● 6541d

I do so hate it when the posting doesn't go in where you expect it to - are you including our Hugh in your 'you two' Andrew?  I shall protest if you are!:-)

Sarah Felstead ● 6541d

"I shall not respond to anymore of your nonsense"This is what you consider to be a debate then?...You said on another thread:- "Have you stopped taking your medication again, AMJA?"

Account suspended ● 6541d

Puh-leese!  I said no such thing.  :-)Where is my kind and gentle Ealing, these days.

Sarah Felstead ● 6541d

"I do so hate it when the posting doesn't go in where you expect it to - are you including our Hugh in your 'you two' Andrew?  I shall protest if you areMost definitely not Hugh Sarah, I am one of his fans, I think they know who I was referring to....phew! that was a close one!

Account suspended ● 6540d

:-)  Andrew.

Sarah Felstead ● 6540d

Has anyone ventured back to Terracotta? In light of the troll's postings in Chiswick, do we think it was actually the lady from the restaurant?

Penny Crocker ● 6540d