Are you finally admitting that the man controlling the "GoldenDragon" account is the same man who controls the "scroobal" account? :p
Or do you still insist:
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Golden Dragon unveiled
- Thread starter winnipegjets
- Start date
Or do you still insist:
The person who controls the scroobal account is not the same person who controls the goldendragon account.
I control many accounts.
It is just one guy controlling both accounts.
If you are the one controlling the "scroobal" account, as you've said:
why did you say this to scroobal last year:
So it comes down to this again... that I'm favouring certain nicks at the expense of others.
In my opinion, I've done a pretty good job being as impartial. If you take a look at the rubbish folder pretty much everyone is represented. It may take a bit longer in certain threads compared to others but that's only because there's only a certain amount of crap here that I can digest on a daily basis so some threads go unread.
Is it this guy? :p
kepinfratrust.com/board_of_directors.html#MARK
Keppel Corporation - Keppel Infrastructure Trust renews Board with two directors
I don't know him in real life, but I think there's a good chance that he's pro-PAP.
Honestly, I still don't know why jw5 is so sure you are "Mark Andrew Yeo Kah Chong (杨家俊)", or how he found the evidence; but that's not important to me.
What's important is whether or not YOU ("GoldenDragon") are TRUSTWORTHY.
Last edited:
That exchange that you posted was the last post the screw posted and afterwards fucked off with the likes of kingrant, deboner etc also take note that thread also also I don't know the 4th or 5th thread that he started in calling our resident froggy the Bangkok pimp.
Try to see in context why he decided to leave after Sam told him but in extremely polite terms to just fuck off and stop bothering and trying to smear other forummers. It wasn't offensive at all he told him you're obnoxious just back off and the nigger scroobal took it personally because in his mind he thinks nobody can tell him off and he thinks that Sam will side him in whatever endeavor he follows which was not the case at all. That occurred last year and you still have members here singing his praises which is just odd because its just a forum and frankly he didn't post anything note worthy at all.
But Leongsam also said, on the same page (first page) of that same thread:
so I don't think Leongsam wanted scroobal to leave.
Leongsam himself praised scroobal in that same POST last year:
yep... i leemember this very clearly cos that yaosiu kia called Froggy the Bangkok Pimp ... a year plus back liao...wow..time flies...
But Leongsam also said, on the same page (first page) of that same thread:
so I don't think Leongsam wanted scroobal to leave.
Leongsam himself praised scroobal in that same POST last year:
Please la sam was between a rock and a hard place. If screw kept on with this shit he might lose froggy. He wants the screw to post here but just to keep it within his rules in which the screw did not accept?
Not hard to notice and sam isn't anyone's ally but he's FAIR. He wasn't froggy's ally during that episode just that the screw felt that with his supposed "status" he could attack any forum member as he pleased in which sam put him in his place. Sam is just fair. Don't ask him to help you. IF you or anyone else overshoots your boundaries you get fucked by him and that's it.
No sam didn;t want scroobal to leave. He just told him to back off attacking another forum member in which the screw thought that was insulting to him because he thought he could do as he pleased. This is obvious to see. If screwball didn't engage in those actions sam wouldn't have told him off.
can we all move along? and leave mark andrew out of this? it's a mistaken identity, and this poor (innocent) bloke must be wondering what on earth hit him. please flush your bowels. it will help to diffuse the constipation and keep the flow going. :o
He would be innocent if he wasn't scroobal. LOL 
I'm as sure <Scroobal> and <GoldenDragon> are the same person, as I was sure the late <Ramseth> and the late <Forvendet> were the same person.
I'm as sure <Scroobal> and <GoldenDragon> are the same person, as I was sure the late <Ramseth> and the late <Forvendet> were the same person.
Please be understanding. JW5 is on medication from Mark's brother, Dr Brian Yeo. Let him throw it all out otherwise poison remains. Hope you can help in his recovery? You simi religion?
Mr Popular, even if I am wrong about his, I am very sane. The way you make allegations and keep harping on the same topic is very typical of someone very familiar to us all.
And by the way, my moniker is <jw5>. Only <scroobal> and <ThickFaceBlackHeart> use JW5. Understand, Manipulative Yet Needy One?
And by the way, my moniker is <jw5>. Only <scroobal> and <ThickFaceBlackHeart> use JW5. Understand, Manipulative Yet Needy One?
Mr Popular, Not Sure what is your big deal in claiming that <scroobal> and <GoldenDragon> are the same person?
Since your moniker joined the forum in 2010, you have been singing <scroobal>'s praises and not one word of criticism. Even in your introductory post (you must be the only forummer who joins with an introductory post), you were singing <scroobal>'s praises. So what is the big problem in being associated with it or being claimed that it is the same person? It should be an honour and a priviledge for you.
Many forummers have been told they have clones or such and such moniker is their clone and have all brushed it off or taken it with a pinch of salt. Why can't you do the same, especially since you say that <scroobal> had lots of "quality posts" and he was wonderful to have around? Would have thought you would be delighted to be thought of as the same person using moniker <scroobal>.
Since your moniker joined the forum in 2010, you have been singing <scroobal>'s praises and not one word of criticism. Even in your introductory post (you must be the only forummer who joins with an introductory post), you were singing <scroobal>'s praises. So what is the big problem in being associated with it or being claimed that it is the same person? It should be an honour and a priviledge for you.
Many forummers have been told they have clones or such and such moniker is their clone and have all brushed it off or taken it with a pinch of salt. Why can't you do the same, especially since you say that <scroobal> had lots of "quality posts" and he was wonderful to have around? Would have thought you would be delighted to be thought of as the same person using moniker <scroobal>.
He would be innocent if he wasn't scroobal. LOL
I'm as sure <Scroobal> and <GoldenDragon> are the same person, as I was sure the late <Ramseth> and the late <Forvendet> were the same person.
there was no need to point out alternate monikers of ramseth as ramseth and forvendet and countless other nicks of the late pundit were various online personae to inject variety, different points of view, mutual masturbatory support, skew vote counts, project diverse personality traits, and assume a myriad of virtual characters. for some it's a self-challenge to "live" and "make belief" a plethora of personalities online without tripping up occasionally. this is what the internet and online social media have allowed anyone to become these days. bruce can become caitlyn, i can be john mccain, my alter ego can become bush, and my neighbor can be donald trump. it's wide open. join in the fun and flow. why must anyone be confined to one moniker and persona? why so caught up with who has what number of monikers? i am mr. jack hammer at arrival in changi, drs. yoni shakyalingam at vd clinic, macik at yong tau fu cum laksa stall in tampines, ah beng mee pork server at soy eu tua kopitiam in siglap, 23-year old tenant in bedok south sharing a room with 2 others, and 69-year old ah pek at pmo with the title "chief of propaganda."
There is no big deal in having clones. There is no big deal in pointing them out either, whether rightly or wrongly. There should be even less of a big deal in just denying it.
there was no need to point out alternate monikers of ramseth as ramseth and forvendet and countless other nicks of the late pundit were various online personae to inject variety, different points of view, mutual masturbatory support, skew vote counts, project diverse personality traits, and assume a myriad of virtual characters. for some it's a self-challenge to "live" and "make belief" a plethora of personalities online without tripping up occasionally. this is what the internet and online social media have allowed anyone to become these days. bruce can become caitlyn, i can be john mccain, my alter ego can become bush, and my neighbor can be donald trump. it's wide open. join in the fun and flow. why must anyone be confined to one moniker and persona? why so caught up with who has what number of monikers? i am mr. jack hammer at arrival in changi, drs. yoni shakyalingam at vd clinic, macik at yong tau fu cum laksa stall in tampines, ah beng mee pork server at soy eu tua kopitiam in siglap, 23-year old tenant in bedok south sharing a room with 2 others, and 69-year old ah pek at pmo with the title "chief of propaganda."
All Internet Monikers are disgraceful. There are no credible monikers in an Internet forum where the members are annonymous.
Similar threads
