Test u a question.
In a busy crowded place when a siao char bor squat and poo all over the place, what will happen ?
:*:
Don't know answer or dare not answer ?
Okay, I apologize for accusing you of:
for that case, so please forgive me.using your own imagination as your "proof".
But to be fair to me:
I am obviously not apologizing, and not going to apologize, for all the above, especially since you've just proven yourself guilty again by repeating that you "don't read most of the posts here".
Couple of points:
So I don't have any need for you to prove your virginity to me; whereas others might not believe you, and since you have repeatedly claimed that you can prove it, that's why I said the following to you:Please don't misunderstand me again, i.e. I believe you when you say that you are a virgin, but my point is that there can be, and there obviously are, many other people who don't believe you, simply because you have no proof, right?
If you truly wanted to convince all of us that you are a virgin, you would have done the following by now (or even last year):
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238006-Ginfreely-vs-The-Coalition&p=2572412#post2572412
and not wait for anyone to post their NRIC details first.After that, she should start a thread with a photo of it, with her full real-life name (plus the clinic's name, of course) on the certificate clearly shown, and also include a piece of paper (in the photo) that says:
"I, ginfreely, am a certified virgin!"
But showing her face is optional. :p
The fact that you are still procrastinating only shows that you are not serious about proving your virginity, simply because you would still have no proof whenever anyone doubts that you are a virgin, right?
This has already gone on for so long, and will continue as long as you have no proof, right?
Do you want it to continue?
If not, then please post your proof as soon as possible, and stop waiting for any of your sammyboy.com enemies to post their NRIC details first!
After you have posted your proof, nobody would have any proof that you are not a virgin, right?
And every time anyone accuses you of being a "slut" or "whore" or any other word that implies that you are not a virgin, you can simply quote your post/thread (that contains the proof of your virginity, i.e. the photo of your "virgin certificate") to counter them, right?
Yes, it is true that you have never attacked me first.
So once again, you're using a "straw man" argument to maliciously attack truly (or at least potentially truly) innocent members by putting words in their mouth, i.e. claiming that they definitely insinuated (or even insulted) you first!I've just finished searching through Cottonmouth's threads, and the following post of yours was your very first reply in any of his threads, replying to Wunderfool about one and a half months ago:
30-10-2016, 06:45 PM
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?237095-Typical-Sinkie-bitch-who-thinks-only-she-s-right&p=2530226#post2530226
So to be fair, I'm afraid you were the one who started this whole quarrel with Cottonmouth, simply because Cottonmouth had not insulted you before you insulted him first. :oNo. This woman dumped cottonmouth and that's why this evil and narrow hearted mudlander psychopath is revenging on her now. What a low blow as usual from mudlander psychopath cottonmouth (previous nick SINKIE).Is this Ginfreely ?I pity her husband for marrying a fucking cunt like her.
What a fucking ugly bitch.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/PokemonGoSG/permalink/1813350045578160/?pnref=story
And I also have to say that I agree with Cottonmouth saying:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238741-Dear-ginfreely-very-sorry-if-this-offends-you-because-I-m-defending-zhihau-but&p=2546811#post2546811
If I were you, I would apologize to Cottonmouth. :oHowever this loonybin drew first blood and I'm making it a life mission to tear her apart.
After that, if Cottonmouth continues insulting you, then I would agree with you that Cottonmouth is in the wrong.
And just to prevent any misunderstanding, I want you to know that I believe all your stories about your real-life problems with certain Chinese Malaysians in JB; but Cottonmouth (and many others you've accused) is not one of them, in my opinion. :o
You have just confirmed my suspicion (similar to what I posted in November last year):
that you are the kind of person who would either:so even if I were to say "sorry" now, you would think I'm being sarcastic, right?
and chose to antagonize both the owner of this forum (Leongsam) and his super-moderator (zhihau)!You may be sane, but you are posting like insane. I know this, because I am also sane, but there were also times where I posted like insane.
Bestest way to deal with the real bullies is to post normally. Then see who are those who continue hounding you and pick them off then. That's the only way to differentiate between the real bullies and the bandwagon types.
However, please co-exist peacefully with zhihau. Anyone who cannot co-exist peacefully with zhihau will not be able to co-exist with anyone in this forum.
Please don't reply to this post. Just take the advice or not.
4. Please be careful, because your vanity (i.e. refusing to admit you're wrong when you are really wrong, just because you want to "save" your "face") and anger will gradually cause you to become really insane one day, which would result in your real-life physical behaviour deteriorating (to say the least) to the point that would motivate/provoke those around you to call the police; after the police arrive, depending on your precise physical actions, the police would either charge you and send you to court first or send you to IMH first, as long as there are clear proofs that your physical actions have actually hurt others or even yourself.
The police will not let you go free, i.e. they will not allow you to be "bailed" out.
5. You have been warned.
Once again, either you have a bad memory or you are maliciously lying:
As for the original sammyboy.com member (or group of members/clones) who slandered you (and that's if they really did slander you) in some old posts/threads, I honestly have no idea who they are because I've never seen those old posts/threads before, so if you would like me to read those old posts/threads, please post their links or PM me.
...
I am 100% sure that you have wrongly/wrongfully accused certain members of being clones of that original member (or group of members/clones) who slandered you (probably a long time ago, I'm guessing), which is probably the main reason those wronged members are so irritated by you.
So once again, if you don't mind letting me know the links to those initial posts/threads in which you were truly the victim, I would also not mind making the effort (which might last for more than a few days or even weeks) to help you ascertain whether the currently active members that you suspect to be clones of your original slanderer (or slanderers) are truly his (or her/their) clones.
Yes, you probably did in other posts after I repeated my requests/challenge in other threads, but I can't be bothered to search for them now, especially since I'm already agreeing that you probably did ask me "to go and search".
But that is not the point, as I've explained several times before:
Couple of points:
:*:Simply because you attacked them without proof!
And I have also explained many times that "insinuations" cannot qualify as real proof!
In that case, since you don't care about my apology, let alone profuse apologies, I shall remove it from my signature, after only less than two days:
"Then please stop wasting your time by replying to me again!
Another couple of points:
Once again, either you have a bad memory or you are maliciously lying:
12-11-2016, 11:17 PM
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?237339-Useless-Sinkie-MILF-Upset-That-Woman-Calls-Her-Crazy-Son-A-Bastard!&p=2534955#post2534955
Yes, you probably did in other posts after I repeated my requests/challenge in other threads, but I can't be bothered to search for them now, especially since I'm already agreeing that you probably did ask me "to go and search".
But that is not the point, as I've explained several times before:
Couple of points:
1. You owed (and still owe) all your victims proofs for your accusations, before you accused any of them in the first place, even if they never bothered to ask for the proofs.
Just like in real life, how can you just go around accusing people without any proof?
2. You also owe EVERYONE (including even guests) many apologies for your incessant spamming last year, even if your accusations were true!
By the way, this is another proof that you are a vain woman addicted to your "face", i.e. you crave for apologies from others so that you can manipulate them even further!
That's why only after I offered to apologize did you quote wuqi's post (even though you should have quoted it a long time ago, whether anyone asks for it or not), right?
Simply because you attacked them without proof!
And you STILL do NOT have the proof, simply because you cannot prove that they are clones of your initial slanderers in the JB sub-forum (especially if you intend to use those lousy "proofs" of yours in a real-life court), right?
Please note that I'm already finally agreeing with you (after you quoted wuqi's post) that you were probably truly slandered by someone (or even more than one moniker) in the JB sub-forum back in 2013 (since you said that it happened two years before wuqi's post in late 2015), but my point is that you still cannot prove that any of those monikers you accused of being clones of that original slanderer are truly his/her clones, right?
And I have also explained many times that "insinuations" cannot qualify as real proof!
You are also lying again by accusing me of acting "innocent as if I have never explained before", when I am well aware of your numerous "explanations" and when you are also aware that I'm aware!
And you are obviously also aware that I've rebutted your numerous "explanations" many times with proofs and logic, right?
Whether or not you agree with my proofs and logic is another issue, but you are certainly aware of them, right?
In that case, since you don't care about my apology, let alone profuse apologies, I shall remove it from my signature, after only less than two days:
"My very first signature:
My apology to ginfreely for wrongly accusing her of one thing:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238006-Ginfreely-vs-The-Coalition&p=2575770#post2575770
but obviously not for everything.
Then please stop wasting your time by replying to me again!
Another couple of points:
1. My mother was born and brought up in Singapore, and has never lived in Malaysia; and neither have her parents ever lived in Malaysia.
2. Insulting my mother has no effect on me, since I hate her too and have not spoken to her for years because I have very good reasons, to say the least.
So, "Hahahahah" back to you!
By the way, I have never insulted your parents before (if I have, please quote that post of mine, and you'll receive yet another apology from me), so may I ask, how would you like it if I were to insult your parents too?
This is yet another proof that you are not a "high class" person at all (as you have claimed many times), but a malicious and vulgar hypocrite! :(
In any case, because you're an adult (and even a middle-aged adult with a substantial amount of life experience), I would not bother to blame your parents (unless you were still a teenager or even in your early 20s).
You have just confirmed my suspicion (similar to what I posted in November last year):
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?237339-Useless-Sinkie-MILF-Upset-That-Woman-Calls-Her-Crazy-Son-A-Bastard!&p=2534955#post2534955
that you are the kind of person who would either:
1. assume/expect that whenever someone is apologizing to you for one thing, he/she is including, or must include, everything else in his/her apology.
or:
2. If he/she refuses to include everything else, you would conclude that his/her apology for that one thing is not sincere.
This once again proves that YOU are really the one who is more in the wrong.
And this is similar to your bad habit of using outright "straw man" arguments to falsely accuse other people of things that they have never said, which is basically twisting their words (or even making up outright lies) to suit yourself.
Or even twisting/amending your own words, without apologizing, in order to cover up your own mistakes, after others point them out to you.
Obviously, not only have you been going all out to attack your imaginary enemies (i.e. sammyboy.com members you imagine to be either clones of your original slanderers in the JB sub-forum or real-life allies of KT Latha, which is the latest problem of yours that you have revealed to us, even though it happened a few years before your problems with your JB neighbours), you are even increasing your hatred towards them by persisting in your attacks whenever they defend themselves and/or counterattack you. :(
If you had at least named your original slanderers AND regularly quoted their original slanderous posts in the JB sub-forum and focus your attacks on them, I might even have supported you, instead of Cottonmouth!
But you have never done that, right?
And even wuqi256 has never named them, even though he seems to have seen those monikers before, right?
You even refused to follow the advice of one of the most senior members, jw5:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?239103-1-killed-4-injured-after-driver-allegedly-went-against-traffic-on-AYE-(19-Dec-2016-)&p=2551500#post2551500
and chose to antagonize both the owner of this forum (Leongsam) and his super-moderator (zhihau)!
If you had wanted to avoid being banned, even if they were/are in the wrong, you should not have attacked them publicly (i.e. in the forum), simply because they are the ones who have the right to impose their own rules on us, whether we agree with them or not.
And obviously, any member who wants to remain active in this forum has to abide by those rules, right?
Otherwise, he/she should simply "self-ban" him/herself, unless he/she prefers to be banned by others instead, after committing even more offences, like what you did. :(
All this will eventually lead to serious:
wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia
imh.com.sg/clinical/page.aspx?id=259
collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/schizophrenia
("any of a group of psychotic disorders characterized by progressive deterioration of the personality, withdrawal from reality, hallucinations, delusions, social apathy, emotional instability, etc")
I'm not sure if you're already schizophrenic or suffering from any other kind of "mental illness", but there is certainly something wrong with you, a problem that started possibly during your childhood, when it was not your fault.
But now that you're an adult (and even a middle-aged adult with a substantial amount of life experience), if you still refuse to make an effort to admit your mistakes (at least silently to yourself), let alone apologize to others, it will gradually become harder to repent in the future, simply because your bad habits will worsen; and as the saying goes, "old habits die hard".
One fine day, if you're not careful, you will literally be arrested, regardless of your age, by the police (which would be ironic, after all the police reports you've made against both your real and imaginary enemies, whether they are your real-life or online ones), as I've explained before:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238006-Ginfreely-vs-The-Coalition&p=2574242#post2574242
Yes, it is true that you have never attacked me first.
But it is not true that those members (or at least some, or even most, of them) you attacked were guilty of insulting you first, simply and especially because even you yourself have claimed many times that they "insinuated" you first, i.e. without naming you (for example, Cottonmouth, being the most recent member I can recall), right?
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238006-Ginfreely-vs-The-Coalition&p=2547192#post2547192
So once again, you're using a "straw man" argument to maliciously attack truly (or at least potentially truly) innocent members by putting words in their mouth, i.e. claiming that they definitely insinuated (or even insulted) you first!
Even if it's true that they were really insinuating you (which might have happened sometimes, but obviously not all the time), just like how KT Latha insinuated you (which I agree, as I've said before), it is still not good enough to prove that they were really insinuating you, let alone directly insulting you!
You must learn to differentiate between TRUTH and PROOF, especially if it's in a real-life court!
In the eyes of the judge, who is only a human being and not God (who Alone can See/Sense everything, including invisible/inaudible intentions, that happens on this flat Earth and who is, therefore, Qualified to be both your Witness and Judge at the same time because of His Infinite Wisdom), a human judge requires CLEAR PROOF, especially human witnesses.
Even if the human witnesses are false witnesses and the proofs are based on lies, the human judge (as long as he/she chooses to work as a judge) is only allowed to judge based on those human witnesses and proofs, simply because he/she is not a witness, so he/she cannot know for sure if those human witnesses and proofs are false.
So, what more if the human witnesses are true witnesses and the proofs are based on truth?
KT Latha, Cottonmouth and possibly even everyone else you have attacked in this forum (since you have never seen the original slanderous posts in that JB thread and, therefore, CANNOT possibly have seen the monikers of the authors of those posts, right?) have never named you when they "insinuated" you first (and that's if they were really insinuating you), right?
So how can you possibly prove that they are clones of your original slanderers in that JB thread, especially since you don't even know the monikers of your original slanderers?
Therefore, since you attacked them directly (i.e. by replying to their posts or naming them) based on their "insinuations" (which may or may not be really insinuating you, as I've explained above), in the eyes of any impartial human judge, you are at the very least more in the wrong, if not 100% in the wrong (if those "insinuations" were really not about you at all).
And that is why, after months of tolerating you (and even ignoring you sometimes), I finally decided to counterattack you on behalf of certain truly innocent victims of your attacks, especially since I was confident that I could do a better job in proving you wrong.
Yes, I agree that the quarrel between me and you was started by me, but I did it (and am still doing it) mainly on behalf of those truly innocent members, such as chootchiew; so, strictly speaking, I did not "attack" you first, but I counterattacked you first, after you first attacked those truly innocent members.
Very danger lah u. When u link unrelated events u will start to attack.
Your own words prove that my accusations were, and still are, true:
so there is no need for you to explicitly ask me for an apology in the past in order for me to prove that you crave for apologies from your enemies, whether online or in real life, so that you can manipulate them even further, as I've said.
Here are three examples to prove you wrong once again, and also to prove again that you either have a bad memory (because the following posts are from only a few months ago) or you are a malicious hypocrite trying to portray yourself as an "innocent victim" by trying to make yourself look so "good" or "nice" or "kind" that you never bothered to demand or ask me to apologize to you:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238006-Ginfreely-vs-The-Coalition&p=2549620#post2549620
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238006-Ginfreely-vs-The-Coalition&p=2549795#post2549795
Once again, your own words prove that you are guilty when you say that I "should" apologize "for all the wrong" that I've done to you, i.e. even if you have never explicitly asked/demanded/expected (which you have, as I've proven above) any apology from me, deep down in your heart and mind, that's what you really want, which I've been suspecting since last year, and you finally proved me right when you said (on "25-02-2017, 02:41 PM"):
and this is the second time I'm quoting your post in this same post of mine.
Please remember what you said in the first post of your "KT Latha" thread, i.e. you were terminated and that you did not resign.
Yet another "straw man" argument!
Your own words prove that my accusations were, and still are, true:
so there is no need for you to explicitly ask me for an apology in the past in order for me to prove that you crave for apologies from your enemies, whether online or in real life, so that you can manipulate them even further, as I've said.
Furthermore, it is also not true that:
Here are three examples to prove you wrong once again, and also to prove again that you either have a bad memory (because the following posts are from only a few months ago) or you are a malicious hypocrite trying to portray yourself as an "innocent victim" by trying to make yourself look so "good" or "nice" or "kind" that you never bothered to demand or ask me to apologize to you:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?237339-Useless-Sinkie-MILF-Upset-That-Woman-Calls-Her-Crazy-Son-A-Bastard!&p=2532501#post2532501
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238006-Ginfreely-vs-The-Coalition&p=2549620#post2549620
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?238006-Ginfreely-vs-The-Coalition&p=2549795#post2549795
Once again, your own words prove that you are guilty when you say that I "should" apologize "for all the wrong" that I've done to you, i.e. even if you have never explicitly asked/demanded/expected (which you have, as I've proven above) any apology from me, deep down in your heart and mind, that's what you really want, which I've been suspecting since last year, and you finally proved me right when you said (on "25-02-2017, 02:41 PM"):
and this is the second time I'm quoting your post in this same post of mine.
Please remember what you said in the first post of your "KT Latha" thread, i.e. you were terminated and that you did not resign.
Whereas KT Latha was not only not terminated even by that ex-boss of yours who sided with you back then, she even continued working under your new boss after you were terminated, right?
So this should prove that you were not only more in the wrong, but much more in the wrong!
Once again, physical violence is always much more serious than verbal "violence", right?
Yet another "straw man" argument!
Because your English should be good enough to understand all my posts, right?
Was I talking about all members or all innocent members?
I said "those members (or at least some, or even most, of them) you attacked" were truly innocent, and they include myself, chootchiew, Cottonmouth, Wunderfool, wikiphile, etc.
I certainly did not say that you attacked members who have never attacked you before, such as "Johnny333, narong or Winnipeg etc", right?
