Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- tedtheodorelogan2018
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3022
- Joined: Fri 14 Sep 2018 12:02am
- Has thanked: 559 times
- Been thanked: 452 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Term is banned by the boss that runs this joint.
Move on. Get over it.
Move on. Get over it.
Posters that have admitted they were wrong about Hanna's gastro and the club didn't create a cover story.
Total = 1.
Total = 1.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Thank god that you post here ted.tedtheodorelogan2018 wrote: ↑Thu 08 Aug 2019 8:17pm Term is banned by the boss that runs this joint.
Move on. Get over it.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6656
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:24pm
- Location: Hotel Bastardos
- Has thanked: 197 times
- Been thanked: 166 times
- Contact:
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Thank cho that you're not a mod.tedtheodorelogan2018 wrote: ↑Thu 08 Aug 2019 8:17pm Term is banned by the boss that runs this joint.
Move on. Get over it.
*Allegedly.
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
...says the poster who raised it in the first place, and most likely dobbed on the OP. Can you tell us again what we're all supposedly saying when we use a popular nickname for our ex-choach?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Wrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobbers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
Last edited by saynta on Fri 09 Aug 2019 2:42pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8375
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
You mean the one extremely obscure meaning .....the one amongst many other legitimate meanings/definitions/uses of the termsaynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 11:42amWrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
You are wrong on this one Saynta - it's completely ridiculous overkill given that 99% of the posters have used the term as a friendly fun nick without any hint of pornographic duplicity
Open your eyes Sanyta and just admit that this is a classic case of over moderation
The Confederation of Healing Organisations, The Credit Hire Organisation, Margaret Cho and some Nepalese villagers agree
Lift the Ban!!
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
- asiu
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10313
- Joined: Thu 08 Apr 2010 8:11pm
- Has thanked: 1327 times
- Been thanked: 932 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
thats 2x b in dobbers
![Image](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_iUpoNBZyaBc/R0zVk-1LCZI/AAAAAAAAAg0/9eeT7D6cnaA/s320/compass-blu-265x220.gif)
.name the ways , thought manipulates the State of Presence away.
.tipara waranta kani nina-tu.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13779
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2050 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Why are we still talking about this?
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Fri 15 Jul 2016 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 55 times
- Been thanked: 92 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Devil head is right. The Urban dictionary has a meaning for almost any 3 letters placed together in the alphabet. Someone is some schoolyard in the US probably with the surname Richardson did that despicable act and now 20 teenagers in the US name it after him. The Urban dictionary gets people updating with these extremely obscure definitions. Anyone over here who believe the term is being used as anything other than short for Richardson is gullible and has no understanding if the way internet terminology such as this is being used. Remember when anyone wearing a black Sabbath T Shirt was a potential devil worshipper? Another sign of an older generation completely out of sync with societal changes.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 1:03pmYou mean the one extremely obscure meaning .....the one amongst many other legitimate meanings/definitions/uses of the termsaynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 11:42amWrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
You are wrong on this one Saynta - it's completely ridiculous overkill given that 99% of the posters have used the term as a friendly fun nick without any hint of pornographic duplicity
Open your eyes Sanyta and just admit that this is a classic case of over moderation
The Confederation of Healing Organisations, The Credit Hire Organisation, Margaret Cho and some Nepalese villagers agree
Lift the Ban!!
Drop the ridiculous freaking ban.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 1:03pmYou mean the one extremely obscure meaning .....the one amongst many other legitimate meanings/definitions/uses of the termsaynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 11:42amWrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
You are wrong on this one Saynta - it's completely ridiculous overkill given that 99% of the posters have used the term as a friendly fun nick without any hint of pornographic duplicity
Open your eyes Sanyta and just admit that this is a classic case of over moderation
The Confederation of Healing Organisations, The Credit Hire Organisation, Margaret Cho and some Nepalese villagers agree
Lift the Ban!!
I call bulls*** on your post. You are the one with your eyes closed.
The term wasn't being used as a" friendly fun nick without any hint of pornographic duplicity". In my view it was being used , by some, with malicious intent , hence the reason Simon banned the term.
Why would you want the ban lifted? So some moron can use it to further denigrate a sacked coach?
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
I have grown tired of the malicious crap printed on here about Richo these past two years and now you want me to believe it was all just a bit of fun. Yeah sure it was.
- barneyboyz
- Club Player
- Posts: 1133
- Joined: Thu 08 Mar 2007 10:13pm
- Has thanked: 177 times
- Been thanked: 123 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Maybe some did? but I reckon most wouldn't have. I know that if I used it, it was ignorance as I've never read the damn thing (but haven't since the ban)saynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 2:40pmDevilhead wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 1:03pmYou mean the one extremely obscure meaning .....the one amongst many other legitimate meanings/definitions/uses of the termsaynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 11:42amWrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
You are wrong on this one Saynta - it's completely ridiculous overkill given that 99% of the posters have used the term as a friendly fun nick without any hint of pornographic duplicity
Open your eyes Sanyta and just admit that this is a classic case of over moderation
The Confederation of Healing Organisations, The Credit Hire Organisation, Margaret Cho and some Nepalese villagers agree
Lift the Ban!!
I call bulls*** on your post. You are the one with your eyes closed.
The term wasn't being used as a" friendly fun nick without any hint of pornographic duplicity". In my view it was being used , by some, with malicious intent , hence the reason Simon banned the term.
Why would you want the ban lifted? So some moron can use it to further denigrate a sacked coach?![]()
![]()
Get real., and move on.
I have grown tired of the malicious crap printed on here about Richo these past two years and now you want me to believe it was all just a bit of fun. Yeah sure it was.
One could get tired of most of the crap that gets posted on here, but you do have options, we all do
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
St. Kilda Football Club. Going strong, since 1960 ![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1824
- Joined: Thu 15 Sep 2011 5:54pm
- Has thanked: 119 times
- Been thanked: 381 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
There is no doubt in my mind that some posters were using the term in a malicious way, in full knowledge of the UD definition. Posters also used it after forum discussion when virtually every forumite must have by then known the meaning.
The figure 99% used above would now apply to SS forumites who now KNOW the meaning. So all the more reason to maintain the ban.
Anyway, Richo has gone, why is it an issue? Some people cannot accept decisions and move on.
The figure 99% used above would now apply to SS forumites who now KNOW the meaning. So all the more reason to maintain the ban.
Anyway, Richo has gone, why is it an issue? Some people cannot accept decisions and move on.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Exactly mate. I don't know why certain posters are still angling to have the ban lifted. Doesn't make much sense to me. Some kind of warped vindication I suppose.takeaway wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 3:26pm There is no doubt in my mind that some posters were using the term in a malicious way, in full knowledge of the UD definition. Posters also used it after forum discussion when virtually every forumite must have by then known the meaning.
The figure 99% used above would now apply to SS forumites who now KNOW the meaning. So all the more reason to maintain the ban.
Anyway, Richo has gone, why is it an issue? Some people cannot accept decisions and move on.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
I said " by some" . I am well aware it was a small minority.barneyboyz wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 3:16pmMaybe some did? but I reckon most wouldn't have. I know that if I used it, it was ignorance as I've never read the damn thing (but haven't since the ban)saynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 2:40pmDevilhead wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 1:03pmYou mean the one extremely obscure meaning .....the one amongst many other legitimate meanings/definitions/uses of the termsaynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 11:42amWrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
You are wrong on this one Saynta - it's completely ridiculous overkill given that 99% of the posters have used the term as a friendly fun nick without any hint of pornographic duplicity
Open your eyes Sanyta and just admit that this is a classic case of over moderation
The Confederation of Healing Organisations, The Credit Hire Organisation, Margaret Cho and some Nepalese villagers agree
Lift the Ban!!
I call bulls*** on your post. You are the one with your eyes closed.
The term wasn't being used as a" friendly fun nick without any hint of pornographic duplicity". In my view it was being used , by some, with malicious intent , hence the reason Simon banned the term.
Why would you want the ban lifted? So some moron can use it to further denigrate a sacked coach?![]()
![]()
Get real., and move on.
I have grown tired of the malicious crap printed on here about Richo these past two years and now you want me to believe it was all just a bit of fun. Yeah sure it was.
One could get tired of most of the crap that gets posted on here, but you do have options, we all do![]()
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8375
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Cause to be held ransom by some bored 13yo kid living in eastern Arkansas making up stupid definitions on UD is ridiculously inane and stupidtakeaway wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 3:26pm There is no doubt in my mind that some posters were using the term in a malicious way, in full knowledge of the UD definition. Posters also used it after forum discussion when virtually every forumite must have by then known the meaning.
The figure 99% used above would now apply to SS forumites who now KNOW the meaning. So all the more reason to maintain the ban.
Anyway, Richo has gone, why is it an issue? Some people cannot accept decisions and move on.
Do you think the legitimate businesses that I provided links to would change their names/nicks due to this obscure UD posting?
If someone uses the term in a duplicitous way then delete the post and ban them .... if not let it be
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
How the f*** did you arrive at the conclusion that " some bored 13yo kid living in eastern Arkansas making up stupid definitions on UD" was the origin of a very offensive phrase. You are just making a wild assumption ffs.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 4:22pmCause to be held ransom by some bored 13yo kid living in eastern Arkansas making up stupid definitions on UD is ridiculously inane and stupidtakeaway wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 3:26pm There is no doubt in my mind that some posters were using the term in a malicious way, in full knowledge of the UD definition. Posters also used it after forum discussion when virtually every forumite must have by then known the meaning.
The figure 99% used above would now apply to SS forumites who now KNOW the meaning. So all the more reason to maintain the ban.
Anyway, Richo has gone, why is it an issue? Some people cannot accept decisions and move on.
Do you think the legitimate businesses that I provided links to would change their names/nicks due to this obscure UD posting?
If someone uses the term in a duplicitous way then delete the post and ban them .... if not let it be
Anyway the phrase is banned here, your businnesses can do whatever thy want apart from using that term here.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8375
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Seriously!!saynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 4:50pmHow the f*** did you arrive at the conclusion that " some bored 13yo kid living in eastern Arkansas making up stupid definitions on UD" was the origin of a very offensive phrase. You are just making a wild assumption ffs.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 4:22pmCause to be held ransom by some bored 13yo kid living in eastern Arkansas making up stupid definitions on UD is ridiculously inane and stupidtakeaway wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 3:26pm There is no doubt in my mind that some posters were using the term in a malicious way, in full knowledge of the UD definition. Posters also used it after forum discussion when virtually every forumite must have by then known the meaning.
The figure 99% used above would now apply to SS forumites who now KNOW the meaning. So all the more reason to maintain the ban.
Anyway, Richo has gone, why is it an issue? Some people cannot accept decisions and move on.
Do you think the legitimate businesses that I provided links to would change their names/nicks due to this obscure UD posting?
If someone uses the term in a duplicitous way then delete the post and ban them .... if not let it be
Anyway the phrase is banned here, your businnesses can do whatever thy want apart from using that term here.![]()
![]()
![]()
It is likely to be some idiot teen or the CEO of Merriam-Webster?
My point is the person who made up the ridiculous definition is more than likely to be a bored insignificant nobody - someone it seems that you and few others on here take quite seriously which is laughable in itself.... you know cause someone who fabricates obscure terms for far fetched ridiculous actions should be exalted
BTW Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Greg "The Hammer" Valentine & Jim "The Anvil" Neihardt also agree with me
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Yawn. Talk to Simon. He was the one who banned the phrase, not me ffs.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 5:29pmSeriously!!saynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 4:50pmHow the f*** did you arrive at the conclusion that " some bored 13yo kid living in eastern Arkansas making up stupid definitions on UD" was the origin of a very offensive phrase. You are just making a wild assumption ffs.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 4:22pmCause to be held ransom by some bored 13yo kid living in eastern Arkansas making up stupid definitions on UD is ridiculously inane and stupidtakeaway wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 3:26pm There is no doubt in my mind that some posters were using the term in a malicious way, in full knowledge of the UD definition. Posters also used it after forum discussion when virtually every forumite must have by then known the meaning.
The figure 99% used above would now apply to SS forumites who now KNOW the meaning. So all the more reason to maintain the ban.
Anyway, Richo has gone, why is it an issue? Some people cannot accept decisions and move on.
Do you think the legitimate businesses that I provided links to would change their names/nicks due to this obscure UD posting?
If someone uses the term in a duplicitous way then delete the post and ban them .... if not let it be
Anyway the phrase is banned here, your businnesses can do whatever thy want apart from using that term here.![]()
![]()
![]()
It is likely to be some idiot teen or the CEO of Merriam-Webster?
My point is the person who made up the ridiculous definition is more than likely to be a bored insignificant nobody - someone it seems that you and few others on here take quite seriously which is laughable in itself.... you know cause someone who fabricates obscure terms for far fetched ridiculous actions should be exalted
BTW Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Greg "The Hammer" Valentine & Jim "The Anvil" Neihardt also agree with me
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 639
- Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2019 9:30pm
- Has thanked: 77 times
- Been thanked: 112 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Someone cried to Mummy and said it’s in the UD.
Mummy learnt something as did most of us on here and made shyte up on the run to suit an agenda.
I agree it’s madness but we are all forbidden to financially contribute to this site so have been blocked out of having real say.
Mummy learnt something as did most of us on here and made shyte up on the run to suit an agenda.
I agree it’s madness but we are all forbidden to financially contribute to this site so have been blocked out of having real say.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6582
- Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 4:52pm
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 1274 times
- Been thanked: 463 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
I always preferred The Milky Bar Kid for Mr Vanilla.
As ex-president Peter Summers said:
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Try? Have I? Do I need to try? You've more than qualified for a life ban...rules are rules, you brought the supposed term to the forum, and the ban should be issued.saynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 11:42amWrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobbers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
Crap. You are trying to rewrite history.degruch wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 10:57pmTry? Have I? Do I need to try? You've more than qualified for a life ban...rules are rules, you brought the supposed term to the forum, and the ban should be issued.saynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 11:42amWrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobbers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
*cough* Got any proof I'm wrong? I know, I know...proofs not your thing...better to make it up and cry wolf.saynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 10:59pmCrap. You are trying to rewrite history.degruch wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 10:57pmTry? Have I? Do I need to try? You've more than qualified for a life ban...rules are rules, you brought the supposed term to the forum, and the ban should be issued.saynta wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 11:42amWrong again. You are making a habit of it. I didn't dob on the original poster. Can't even tell you who it was but he/she wasn't the only one,
According to Simon, the original author was banned. And contrary to the s*** posted on here by the bone worriers, Simon was well aware of the meaning of the very offensive term.
And while we are talking about dobbers, how many times have you tried to get me banned?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Insights into the mind of ‘cho’
There were a few posters who knew the term was offensive including Simon.Special wrote: ↑Fri 09 Aug 2019 10:46pm Someone cried to Mummy and said it’s in the UD.
Mummy learnt something as did most of us on here and made shyte up on the run to suit an agenda.
I agree it’s madness but we are all forbidden to financially contribute to this site so have been blocked out of having real say.
If I was Simon I wouldn't take any money from you either.
Accusing Simon of making shyte up on the run is pretty offensive.
A couple of posters including you are carrying on about ths issue like two year olds who can't get their own way.
f****** pathetic really.