Yeager... Likes INGO except two people

[mom45]

I would like to introduce the newest member of Lurk Team 6!, , , what's his name agian? Oh yeah, Fenway!As the newest member, your buying donuts tomorrow!!!

 

[RobbyMaQ]

I am just glad he's never logged on... which means I couldn't have given him an infraction..., which reduces my odds of being one of the two ever so slightly.

 

[jd4320t]

I am just glad he's never logged on... which means I couldn't have given him an infraction..., which reduces my odds of being one of the two ever so slightly.

Good to hear you say that Robby. James pack your bags Yeager made physical threats to a member on here and shouldn't ever be allowed in. I was happy to see the INGO love affair with him die down.

Edit: the rest of this post is not directed at RobbyMaQ.


No such thing as bad publicity right?

I hope I never drop that low.

 

[RobbyMaQ]

Good to hear you say that Robby. James pack your bags Yeager made physical threats to a member on here and shouldn't ever be allowed in. I was happy to see the INGO love affair with him die down.

No such thing as bad publicity right?

I hope I never drop that low.

If I recall, he made a video on you tube which made threats to an INGO member. We cannot control what youtube puts on their site nor what someone says offsite. And anyone is certainly welcome to their own personal opinion. I am not sure what the problem is there?
Perhaps I should share some of the pm responses from classifieds infractions? They beat yeager's pancake comment hands down.

 

[chezuki]

Perhaps I should share some of the pm responses from classifieds infractions? They beat yeager's pancake comment hands down.

I'd like to pre-order that book and subscribe to your newsletter please.

 

[RobbyMaQ]

I'd like to pre-order that book and subscribe to your newsletter please.

I'd almost bite... if only to prove we aren't always as heavy handed as some would like to believe.

 

[Sylvain]

If I recall, he made a video on you tube which made threats to an INGO member. We cannot control what youtube puts on their site nor what someone says offsite. And anyone is certainly welcome to their own personal opinion. I am not sure what the problem is there?
Perhaps I should share some of the pm responses from classifieds infractions? They beat yeager's pancake comment hands down.

The problem is how INGO staff (some of the staff anyway) supported the person who made those threats to a trusted INGO member.

 

[jd4320t]

If I recall, he made a video on you tube which made threats to an INGO member. We cannot control what youtube puts on their site nor what someone says offsite. And anyone is certainly welcome to their own personal opinion. I am not sure what the problem is there?
Perhaps I should share some of the pm responses from classifieds infractions? They beat yeager's pancake comment hands down.

The countless INGO promoted videos after are the problem. I'm a contributing member. If I made threats like that towards a member I'd be banned.

 

[jdmack79]

The problem is how INGO staff (some of the staff anyway) supported the person who made those threats to a trusted INGO member.

Exactly. I have far more of a problem with how the staff reacted to the incident than the incident itself.

 

[bwframe]

...trusted INGO member.

Interesting choice of words. Wasn't the whole issue about this "trusted INGO member" lying?

 

[jdmack79]

Interesting choice of words. Wasn't the whole issue about this "trusted INGO member" lying?

Prove it. If you can't provide hard proof, I'd take the trusted member's word over yours.

 

[Sylvain]

Interesting choice of words. Wasn't the whole issue about this "trusted INGO member" lying?

It was only allegations as far as we know.
And even if he was lying that still would not make it okay to threaten him and to support the person who threatened him at the time.

 

[Que]

The problem is how INGO staff (some of the staff anyway) supported the person who made those threats to a trusted INGO member.

Which staff?

 

[sepe]

Witch staff!!!!

 

[chezuki]

Prove it. If you can't provide hard proof, I'd take the trusted member's word over yours.

I trust Burl over someone I've never met who jumped ship when his story was questioned.

Would have been very easy for Jeremy to clear his name if he were telling the truth. The fact that he didn't and bailed instead is what leaves me suspicious.

 

[bwframe]

Prove it. If you can't provide hard proof, I'd take the trusted member's word over yours.

It was only allegations as far as we know.
And even if he was lying that still would not make it okay to threaten him and to support the person who threatened him at the time.

Sounded to me like they did prove it. That's why Jeremy has never returned to address it. He's the one that needs to do the proving of his statements and apparently he cannot. Not to mention, I'll take Que's word 100% of the time.

 

[Que]

It was only allegations as far as we know.
And even if he was lying that still would not make it okay to threaten him and to support the person who threatened him at the time.

So, you really believe all of that was serious support of a fight? Okay, sure. The whole thing was all fun and games until it was posted that he lied. But, you know he was telling the truth, right?

 

[Sylvain]

I trust Burl over someone I've never met who jumped ship when his story was questioned.

Would have been very easy for Jeremy to clear his name if he were telling the truth. The fact that he didn't and bailed instead is what leaves me suspicious.

Maybe he didn't want to show proofs on a public forum?

 

[sepe]

I wouldn't take anyone's word 100% of the time. Nothing good ever comes from that. But onto the jeremy leaving and the roid raging d-bag...

It is the Internet for babby jeebus' sake.

 

[Que]

Maybe he didn't want to show proofs on a public forum?

Be certainly didn't have any trouble being Ranger Knowitall on a public forum!