In reply to:

---

Sorry about your preoccupation, too. I hope it's not much longer til you get the real occupation.

---

I have been zinged and I love it!

This is what a poor person do for a scholarship
He turned around, got a face full of hollow tips
But don't be mad
He died for the flag

In reply to:

---

It's not that I dislike it Alan, I've tried to join BWW many times, but some members on there have obviously given me a bad name, namely Stu for one, so therefore I am not allowed to join, pity.

---

I have no recollection of ever having mentioned you at BWW, Herman. If you have problems joining they must be of your own making. I do know that Mr Kinder instigated a system whereby new members have to register some months back after some troll trouble. Presumably if you can't get past that then you've proven to be troublesome. Why am I not surprised?

Stu
Get Bowie Back Downunder

Still treating us little people to your presence with searches for your name then Stu?


And seriously: we now have dogz in a position where he can bother the online Bowie community as little as possible and you're encouraging him to join BWW?


You're the greatest Stu!

Deny your culture of consumption;
this is a culture of destruction

In reply to:

---

Presumably if you can't get past that then you've proven to be troublesome. Why am I not surprised?

---

I don't know, why are you not surprized?

Do you really think I want to be part of a group, namely BWW, where one has to say... follow you blindy with I LOVE YOU posts

NO! you can keep your site darling, I would hate to end up just posting ROFFLE for the sake of being a member.

Good one Stu



London Bye Ta-Ta...

I don't think we've met, EmpireStateHuman. I don't recall your name (it's not in the dossier). Unless you're someone else? Shyster probably.

In reply to:

---

Still treating us little people to your presence with searches for your name then Stu?

---

No, actually, I came over to do a search for "BWW" since we've been having a little troll trouble over there and naturally I assumed it was one of you TWats.

In reply to:

---

And seriously: we now have dogz in a position where he can bother the online Bowie community as little as possible...

---

Do you? Please explain.

In reply to:

---

...and you're encouraging him to join BWW?

---

Far from it. I'd like to watch the twat as he died screaming, but as for encouraging him to pollute BWW with his mindless drivel....nein danke.

In reply to:

---

You're the greatest Stu!

---

You're too kind.

Stu
Get Bowie Back Downunder

In reply to:

---

I don't know, why are you not surprized?

---

I see your command of English hasn't improved, Herman.

In reply to:

---

Do you really think I want to be part of a group, namely BWW, where one has to say... follow you blindy with I LOVE YOU posts

---

I have no idea what this means.

In reply to:

---

NO! you can keep your site darling, I would hate to end up just posting ROFFLE for the sake of being a member.

---

Never ever having used that particular phrase, I'm sure I don't know what you mean. But then that's the usual state of affairs with your posts, since I don't speak gibberish.

Stu
Get Bowie Back Downunder

In reply to:

---

I don't think we've met, EmpireStateHuman. I don't recall your name (it's not in the dossier). Unless you're someone else? Shyster probably.

---

Ah, no, not Shyster. There are too many snappy pop culture references in your post titles for it to be that deadhead old fart. They look a lot like twisterisms, though. Out of the iron lung at last, Chris?

Stu
Get Bowie Back Downunder

Oh, no, not twister. Just a well-trained puppy, eh Adrian?

Sit up and beg.

Stu
Get Bowie Back Downunder

In reply to:

---

Oh, no, not twister. Just a puppy, eh Adrian?

---

Do you always do your thinking aloud like you did when trying to work out my extremely well-kept secret?

Do you often wander around shopping centres in the afternoon saying 'I wonder what my wife is cooking for dinner? It's chicken, I'm sure of it!'. To which statements people back off and look bewildered.



Regardless, dogz is restricted to 5 posts a day and this is the only Bowie site he likes. Hopefully he will exceed that limit soon and be banned for good.


And, seriously Stu, it's good to see you; your paranoia, baseless personal attacks and way with an insult feel like... well, they feel like TW.

Deny your culture of consumption;
this is a culture of destruction

In reply to:

---

Do you always do your thinking aloud like you did when trying to work out my extremely well-kept secret?

---

Er....obviously. But I didn't "work" it "out" (too many puppies to choose from). Someone told me. So my "thinking aloud" proved to be a useful exercise. You should try it sometime. Thinking, that is.

In reply to:

---

Do you often wander around shopping centres in the afternoon saying 'I wonder what my wife is cooking for dinner? It's chicken, I'm sure of it!'. To which statements people back off and look bewildered.

---

I can't say I've ever done anything like that. But then I've never been to New Zealand.

In reply to:

---

Regardless, dogz is restricted to 5 posts a day and this is the only Bowie site he likes.

---

Ahhh, I see. Another band-aid solution. Unfortunately the scumbag seems to be familiar (if typically confused) with the environment at BWW so, despite his protestations to the contrary, I suspect he visits - though apparently he's been prevented from posting somehow (which is a blessing).

In reply to:

---

Hopefully he will exceed that limit soon and be banned for good.

---

For once we agree. Keeping loons off the internet should be law.

In reply to:

---

And, seriously Stu, it's good to see you;...

---

Yeah, right.

Stu
Get Bowie Back Downunder