Friday, July 15, 2011

Shit Morons Say ... about themselves.

"I’ve never taken your words or the words of others out of context."

This was said by John, aka AnonyJohn, aka Anonymous, aka a variety of names on David's blog. He is still trolling around there declaring victory. It is kind of strange to hear him claim that he has never taken anyone's words out of context considering shit he has said here as well as on David's blog.

"Yet, you douches are the only ones comfortable with calling people derogatory terms like “ricetards,” peasants, mooks (clever play on the word gook?), and etc, but you get butthurt when you get criticized for it?"

He all but accused me of using mook in place of gook as a racial slur. Instead of being a man and flat out making the accusation he tries to be subtle and imply it.

You know what I do when I encounter a new word, or an old one I am unsure of? It is something I learned to do as a child. I look it up in a dictionary or ask someone what it means. Sometimes I do both to make sure I know the meaning. John should learn how to use a dictionary before pointing fingers.

Oh fuck it, I know the 'tard is too lazy to look it up. A mook is term I learned watching American gangster movies and television shows. It refers to someone who is ignorant in the true sense of the word (not knowing), selfish, rude, or a combination. Some define mook as an insignificant or contemptible person. It has nothing to do with the derogatory term gook or being Asian. Talk about using a word out of context. Mook does seem to fit John.

"You said that as if stereotypes are things only Koreans do, or that the stereotypes created in Korea are somehow worse than ones made in your country."

John made that comment on this blog as Anonymous. Yet no where in my posts did I say that. Something he had to admit to after Eve brought it up. But hey, he never takes the words of others out of context.

"“Korea used to have more diversity in wildlife, but tough times and a growing population have depleted their numbers. ”

So did England, America, Scotland, and every other first-world nation. You are stupid and yes, you are a bigot."

AnonyJohn posted this gem on David's blog. However, he left out something. Right after the sentence David wrote that JohnnyBoy zoned in on David mentioned that EVERY COUNTRY does it. By leaving that out John opened the comment to criticism and used it ... OUT OF CONTEXT. But he never does that, according to John.

What happened when this was pointed out to John? Did he reply by doing a mea culpa? Did he apologize for leaving that out just so he could attack David and seem justified? Of course not, that isn't John's style. His reply was to continue what he said he doesn't do, use things out of context.

"You were trying to argue that Korea is uniquely hostile to wildlife or something, as opposed to other first-world countries."

No, actually he said that Korea like every other country is hostile to animals.

I suppose he would say he never makes shit up either. However, he did just that when he accused me of writing a post titled "Retarded Shit Koreans Do". No such post or thread exists on my blog.

And John still wonders why people think he is a moron and a troll.


  1. Yip yip. I was using "mook" long before I went to Korea, and I'm still using it now. Especially when my neighbour decides to do repairs on his car at 2:00 in the morning.
    Fucking mook.

  2. Sorry, Flint... gotta call you out as a Mook.

    The comments about the wildlife was made by Jaim, not John. Getting senile?

  3. Actually that would be a moron. I would have to go back and look.

    Senile? Could be John. But you beat me there. :)

  4. You are right, John. That wasn't you. Sorry about that. When I was reading that I thought Jaim was one of your socks. You used so many on David's site, but I guess he isn't you.

    Oh, and welcome back. :) Didn't take long. :)

  5. "I told you I was done with you, then all you do is constantly provoke me on your site to try and get me to answer you. "

    Interesting comment from John on David's blog. Now, if I am to take him at his word that he is gone and not coming back why would it matter what I say on this blog? If he wasn't lying he wouldn't see it therefore it wouldn't provoke him. Right?

    Interesting that he said all I do is provoke him on my site. Let's see, since his good bye what exatly have I posted? (Leaving out Stig's posts.)

    What the ... Dokdo related stupidity?!?!? (July 15th)
    Shit Morons Say ... about themselves. (July 15th)
    Year 2 - the Latest Happenings (at that time)
    What the referral?!?!?
    Year 2 - Where is the address?
    Anonymous Comment about KS
    Shit My Students Say/Said ... About Summer Vacation.
    Korean Movies (Where I actually said something good about John.)
    Year 1 - Playing Tourist At Home
    PyeongChang, South Korea, to Host 2018 Winter Olympic Games
    Turning Textboots Into Tablets
    AnonyJohn - The Spam Post
    Asian Movie Website
    Shit Morons Say ... about leaving internet sites (July 4th)

    So, once on the 4th commenting on his drama queen "exit" and once on the 15th. Yeah, that is some heavy constant provocation. Really. At least in John's world.

    If he was lying and full of shit, like I assumed, then he would see it and feel the need to reply. Which he did.

    So one asusmption was right. John can't keep his word, his "I am done" comment was a load of bull meant to create a little drama for the queen. He is back.

    Another assumption, that Jaim was a sock of John's was wrong. Or was it?

    I am batting .500 :) John considered 2 out of 15 posts to be contant provocation, which would be batting .1333333333333333333333. My batting average looks a lot better, perfect if Jaim is his sock.

    Keep smiling John. :)

    1. "Another assumption, that Jaim was a sock of John's was wrong. Or was it?"

      Why did you think he is Jaim? Do you still think he is?

    2. There were some similarities in their "style", or lack thereof. A few posts where they were both attacking David were similar.

      I am not saying I think he definitely was Jaim. I am just saying that given his trolling and use of socks I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out he was Jaim.

  6. I suppose some, like John, may say "Oh Flint there were 3 posts aimed at John not 2." That would be true if you consider the AnonyJohn -The Spam Post, a posting of and reply to a comment he made before his "I am done" comment. I don't consider it so I said 2.

    Keep smiling John. :)

  7. You called that one. Two weeks until the troll created a reason to return.

  8. whitey fight whitey! kill youself!

  9. 1st Anonymous:

    What can I say. His type is predictable.

  10. 2nd anonymous:

    Your type is predictable too.

  11. You did mention him in 3 of 15 posts. That is hardly constant provocation but it is a degree of provocation.

  12. I agree it is a degree of provocation. It wouldn't have been if he was true to his word and was done with me.

    Mind you he considers posting in the relevant thread on David's site about his condescension towards another poster as provocation. And he STILL hasn't answered anything about that.

  13. Why does he even troll these sites?

  14. He needs to get a life.

  15. Typical John. He ignores everything said except about him being Jaim. No apologies for where he was wrong. He always cherry picks. It wouldn't surprise me to find that he did post as Jaim.

  16. 2 Anonymii above:

    I can't say too much about that. I need to as well. :)

  17. 1 Anonymous above:

    I wouldn't be surprised either but I am willing to believe it wasn't him.

  18. 2 Anonymous

    - Cherry picks? No, dumbass. I've made lengthy comments here several times about all of the issues. Guess who isn't posting them?

  19. Bwahahahaha .... good try. :)

  20. Oh, did I not address what you said so you sent more drek? I didn't post a whole ... 2 posts ... that just rambled on about the same stuff that AnonyJohn would post while ignoring reality (stereotypes and group think being his favourite chew toy). Oh and for some reason those comments, like the other one I DID post, ended up in the spam file. Must be something to do with so many anonymous posts at the same time, yes?

    So ... let's see John complains that MANY comments containing lengthy posts were not allowed. It is actually 1 which was posted and 2 which just repeated what he has already said ... which is a nice troll tactic of his. Yes John ... many posts ... in your world. In the real world TWO comments were not posted. What colour is the sky in your world?