Talk to Gemma's friends

HeartofSorrow · Post by **HeartofSorrow** » Thu May 24, 2007 9:27 pm

Oh no Gemma is alive and posting on this forum! I always thought that avatar was suspicous.

SARAHPHOBIA88 · Post by **SARAHPHOBIA88** » Thu May 24, 2007 9:47 pm

I'm confused!

Languorous Lass · Post by **Languorous Lass** » Fri May 25, 2007 9:23 am

gemmacrowley wrote:
iampenguin wrote:
gemmacrowley wrote: Your an angry little person aren't you. Maybe you spent a liitle to much time in here and need to get outside for some fresh air. Or maybe a life.
Woah, hey, take it easy....

Lass, Gemma just calls Daniel Danny because, well...Its just a variation of the same name. I call him Dan simply because I like to shorten names.

Crowly, there is not reason to get personal, really...
Just having a little fun, he or she is a big boy or girl or whatever. I'm sure lass can take it

I was asking a legitimate question. Nobody else seems to refer to Daniel as "Danny."

If you consider insulting people "a little fun," you're not the kind of person I'd want to spend time with. And if you're genuinely associated with the Order, you're not exactly a great advertisement for it.

Particularly if you're so slow that you can't figure out that someone named "Lass" is female.

Oh, and thanks for standing up for me, Penguin.

gemmacrowley · Post by **gemmacrowley** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:17 pm

Languorous Lass wrote:
gemmacrowley wrote:
iampenguin wrote: Woah, hey, take it easy....

Lass, Gemma just calls Daniel Danny because, well...Its just a variation of the same name. I call him Dan simply because I like to shorten names.

Crowly, there is not reason to get personal, really...
Just having a little fun, he or she is a big boy or girl or whatever. I'm sure lass can take it
I was asking a legitimate question. Nobody else seems to refer to Daniel as "Danny."

If you consider insulting people "a little fun," you're not the kind of person I'd want to spend time with. And if you're genuinely associated with the Order, you're not exactly a great advertisement for it.

Particularly if you're so slow that you can't figure out that someone named "Lass" is female.

Oh, and thanks for standing up for me, Penguin.

I'm so sorry but in a world filled with transgender people I would never risk insulting anyone. I sent you an email prior to you making this post and told you I was sorry. It is your choice not to accept my apology. I misread your post and therefore I apologized. There is nothing more I can do about. I really could care less about your feelings. Plus we should all be happy about the good news from Bree.

Languorous Lass · Post by **Languorous Lass** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:52 pm

gemmacrowley wrote:I'm so sorry but in a world filled with transgender people I would never risk insulting anyone.

Someone who refers to herself as "Lass" clearly thinks of herself as "she."

gemmacrowley wrote:I sent you an email prior to you making this post and told you I was sorry. It is your choice not to accept my apology.

You said you were sorry if you hurt my feelings. As I said in my PM, you didn't hurt my feelings -- you pissed me off.

gemmacrowley wrote: I misread your post and therefore I apologized. There is nothing more I can do about.

You didn't say anything about misreading my post. In fact, here is the sum total of your PM:

gemmacrowley wrote:Lass,

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Cheers,
Gemma

How does this message relate to "misreading my post"? And how does "misreading my post" justify -- or even relate to -- calling me an "angry little person" and suggesting that I get a life?

gemmacrowley wrote:I really could care less about your feelings.

Then why did you say you were sorry if you hurt them?

I would be willing to accept a genuine apology. Your apology was clearly not genuine.

sack36 · Post by **sack36** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:56 pm

You obviously can't get it through your head that Gemma is absolutely, positively, unequivically not coming back. Ever. This is not opinion. This is not conjecture. This is fact. Cold hard fact. Gemma is not coming back.

_________________
Shhhhh!!
Member of the Danielbeast Fan Club
A Fan Club member of Lurker's
Great Aunt Sue from http://2grandmas.com

Languorous Lass · Post by **Languorous Lass** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:59 pm

[quote="sack36"]You obviously can't get it through your head that Gemma is absolutely, positively, unequivically not coming back. Ever. This is not opinion. This is not conjecture. This is fact. Cold hard fact. Gemma is not coming back.

Sack, I don't understand the basis for your statement.

Gemma wasn't one of Glenn's characters, AFAIK. And AFAIK, his characters are the only ones that are unequivocally unable to come back.

gemmacrowley · Post by **gemmacrowley** » Fri May 25, 2007 4:10 pm

Languorous Lass wrote:
gemmacrowley wrote:I'm so sorry but in a world filled with transgender people I would never risk insulting anyone.
Someone who refers to herself as "Lass" clearly thinks of herself as "she."

gemmacrowley wrote:I sent you an email prior to you making this post and told you I was sorry. It is your choice not to accept my apology.
You said you were sorry if you hurt my feelings. As I said in my PM, you didn't hurt my feelings -- you pissed me off.

gemmacrowley wrote: I misread your post and therefore I apologized. There is nothing more I can do about.
You didn't say anything about misreading my post. In fact, here is the sum total of your PM:

gemmacrowley wrote:Lass,

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Cheers,
Gemma
How does this message relate to "misreading my post"? And how does "misreading my post" justify -- or even relate to -- calling me an "angry little person" and suggesting that I get a life?

gemmacrowley wrote:I really could care less about your feelings.
Then why did you say you were sorry if you hurt them?

I would be willing to accept a genuine apology. Your apology was clearly not genuine.

Lass, I'm sorry if I pissed you off. It wasn't my intention. However I really don't care about your feeling but that doesn't mean I want to hurt them or piss you off as you've done nothing to me. Take it for what it is.

Cheers mate

sack36 · Post by **sack36** » Fri May 25, 2007 4:44 pm

OOC: She left the show because she had more important things to do and she stated publicly that she no longer had time to do the show.
IC: They killed her! Didn't you see the video??

Languorous Lass · Post by **Languorous Lass** » Fri May 25, 2007 5:04 pm

gemmacrowley wrote:Lass, I'm sorry if I pissed you off. It wasn't my intention. However I really don't care about your feeling but that doesn't mean I want to hurt them or piss you off as you've done nothing to me. Take it for what it is.

Cheers mate

Well, this is a confusing response.

But it's not worth either of us expending more time on the subject, so let's just move on.

sack36 wrote:OOC: She left the show because she had more important things to do and she stated publicly that she no longer had time to do the show.
IC: They killed her! Didn't you see the video??

OOC: my understanding is that Jackie didn't have time because she was going back to school. But summer semester is upon us.

IC: No, I didn't see the video. But my understanding is that the video didn't actually show her being killed -- it just contained a statement from somebody saying that she had been.

If I don't see the body, I don't believe the person is dead.

sack36 · Post by **sack36** » Fri May 25, 2007 5:34 pm

Languorous Lass wrote:
sack36 wrote:OOC: She left the show because she had more important things to do and she stated publicly that she no longer had time to do the show.
IC: They killed her! Didn't you see the video??
OOC: my understanding is that Jackie didn't have time because she was going back to school. But summer semester is upon us.

IC: No, I didn't see the video. But my understanding is that the video didn't actually show her being killed -- it just contained a statement from somebody saying that she had been.

If I don't see the body, I don't believe the person is dead.

The video showed her walking down a street from the POV of a gunsight. The cross-hairs centered on her; you heard a gunshot; then the video ends. That seems pretty dead to me, considering they didn't want the post pulled due to inappropriate content.

Lurker · Post by **Lurker** » Fri May 25, 2007 7:33 pm

Actually, there wasn't a gunshot heard. The video just faded out to white light.

That said, though, an OpAPHID vid shortly thereafter contained a hidden message: "RIP Gemma." Until we get a reason to think otherwise, I'd say she's dead too.

jbopp · Post by **jbopp** » Fri May 25, 2007 10:25 pm

On the topic at hand, who said Gemma was ever in London? There's no reason Brother couldn't have found her in CA and of course she made it sound like it happened in London because she was saying she was in London. I don't think she was ever actually there, i think everything was set up.