Who wants more Jonas?

longlostposter · Post by **longlostposter** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:55 pm

Well, that is part of the religious front HoO puts on, and there is a Crowley quote on their webpage, but that's as far as it goes, apparently.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:56 pm

longlostposter wrote:Well, I think we got one answer already. Aleistar Crowley is not involved in HoO, because it's not a religion.

Thousands of hours of research...out the window.

It's not? I thought it was a religion that was being used by an evil, powerful, international illuminatti clone. I thought the comment about that was rhetoric.

(goes off to erase all those lines of research.)

alysaface · Post by **alysaface** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:59 pm

ahhh ok

goofsters!

longlostposter · Post by **longlostposter** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:01 pm

Susan, Bree said it wasn't a religion and Gemma said it wasn't a religion. I didn't know when Gemma said it, but with confirmation from Bree, I think we can count it as truthful.

ETA: Yeah, they led us around, Alysa, but then I don't think even they knew where they were going with this thing. Right?

Der.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:05 pm

Actually, to get serious with this for a moment, any religion where there is at least one true believer is a religion in my book. That the underpinnings say differently is moot.

longlostposter · Post by **longlostposter** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:10 pm

Well, OK, I can see that; but as far as research producing fruit in this case, I don't think that's going to happen.

Where'd you get those eyes from?

Jeepers, creepers, where'd you get those peepers?

Chelseyrl · Post by **Chelseyrl** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:26 pm

longlostposter wrote:Jeepers, creepers, where'd you get those peepers?

longlostposter · Post by **longlostposter** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:30 pm

Chelseyrl wrote:
longlostposter wrote:Jeepers, creepers, where'd you get those peepers?

I take it you're not mad at me anymore, Chel? I'm so glad.

Chelseyrl · Post by **Chelseyrl** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:45 pm

Never was!

I just strongly disagree with your photo.

longlostposter · Post by **longlostposter** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:06 pm

Cool.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:26 pm

longlostposter wrote:Well, OK, I can see that; but as far as research producing fruit in this case, I don't think that's going to happen.

Where'd you get those eyes from?

Jeepers, creepers, where'd you get those peepers?

http://bestsmileys.com/eyes/

I think the research is still valid, I just think we need to (yells out to Ronin, "What's that word you were using the other day about the religion stuff?") (Wow! That was quite the discussion. He used the word redact and I said it couldn't have been because that was just a revision in a manuscript so he got out his OED and pontificated. When he was done, I told him I'd just go with the term "rethink" and he grumbled agreement.) So where was I?...

Yeah, we just need to rethink our angle to what the Order needed to include in the religion to get people to do what they wanted.

longlostposter · Post by **longlostposter** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:53 am

Susan wrote:Yeah, we just need to rethink our angle to what the Order needed to include in the religion to get people to do what they wanted.

OK, I can go with that, but as far as deep research of Crowley himself, at this point I don't think much can be accomplished by that.

kittenishtrance · Post by **kittenishtrance** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:08 am

OH!! You put "Jonas sucks" on your avatar! Why?

longlostposter · Post by **longlostposter** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:26 am

kittenishtrance wrote:OH!! You put "Jonas sucks" on your avatar! Why?

well, when Jonas came in the chat the other night, he had a thread locked. Consideration then posted what she thought about that in a separate topic, which was then deleted. I didn't know about her topic, and when I went down there, I started a topic of my own, quite the same as hers. Mine stayed. It's entitled "Jonas if You Ever Come in Here again" if you want to read the thread.

He came in the next day, and, after reading my topic, said he was kidding about the thread lock, and "commanded" Diane to unlock it, making her look incompetent. Then, he posted this to me:

jonastko wrote:dude i was totally joking. NEVER thought it would be locked. totally said it sarcastically. people can say whatever they want. don't really care.

From there, it went here:

longlostposter wrote:
jonastko wrote:
longlostposter wrote:Alright, Jonas. I apologize.

And I don't know if you meant dude literally or not, so I'll just tell you I'm a woman. My name is Juli.
.
Thanks dude. Of course I know you're a chick... read your signature .
Good. Then will you tell Daniel I'm hot for his bod?

I didn't like this exchange, though some people think I'm a little too sensitive about it. I told him I was a woman, and he called me a chick. This pissed me off on top of the other stuff. You really should go look at the thread, he was arrogant.

But...
and this is the main point...
whoever was playing Jonas in that chat was totally out of character. When have you ever heard Jonas call a female "dude" or "chick"? Does Jonas say, "Hey, Bree, dude, come here". No way. It was retarded all the way around.

Jonas in in-character chat...sucks.

kittenishtrance · Post by **kittenishtrance** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:25 am

Oh, well that's weird. I'm sorry you had a bad incident with "him" or whoever was pretending to be him.

Lonelygirl15

Who wants more Jonas?

Who thinks Jonas is better than air and you will kill yourself for him?