"There is no amount of pretty in the world that can cover a venomous heart."

Ah, the irony! Rhonda Huntress said that, and she also said:

http://forums-archive.secondlife.com/327/85/252954/3653.html (The quote in Rio's post, sixth post down.)

http://forums-archive.secondlife.com/327/85/252954/3828.html (Top post.)

Wednesday, 13 April 2011

And in a reversal of fortunes . . .

Now that he's reopened his Titter feed again, here are some fascinating comments from the ex-Miss Russia - or am I getting Nat and Miss Piggy confused?

"It hurts Pep's feelings when people lock their Twitter accounts to stop him stalking"

Perhaps it hurts Nat's feelings when his paranoia is exposed; the exposure means that his paranoia is transparent again now, of course. Scylla must be cowering with embarrassment.

"That's our Pep! Course, he doesn't publish blog comments he doesn't like"

I only censor comments that have bad language in them. It's Nat that censors posts he is embarrassed by, as he admitted in his tittering before he closed it down; how embarrassing!

Scylla is apparently getting concerned about Nat's Tittering, it seems, and is stalking him:

"So Scyl was looking through people's tweets last night and found the Canadian beaver discussion. I had some explaining to do. I know how to handle my Rhiadra..."

Ah! THAT is why he took his Titter feed off line! More embarrassment, eh!

But here's the best one:

"And Pep? I've never been quite sure if you were jealous of me cause I was with Scyl, or jealous of Scyl cause she was with me."

Erm . . . did I know you when you were a GIRL then Nat? Is THAT what this is all about - a "woman" scorned and all that.

1 comment:

  1. Pep, I think you captured something at the end of your post. Why would Nat, who professes a command of the English language, write 'was with Scyl/was with me' rather than 'am/is'.
    Nat, you know that my OP was not all about you and your girl avatar; it was about breech of trust and deception. These things do happen in SL, ya know.
    Your signature, 'Reputation's Changeable' indicates that you are keenly aware of your past. What exactly do you wish to change? Is it the deception? Is it the haranguing of forum women when they spurned your advances? You could start by publicly apologizing to them. In fact, you owe Sus an apology for calling her 'Sus' in your tweet. She hates that nickname with a passion. Ask her about it sometime.
    You are confused, Nat. You write that you learned that 'men are pigs' (four times, no less, in one post) knowing that it would attract some women while others would pity your self-loathing. In the same paragraph you say that you bring 'her out now and then as a change of pace'. Why is that?
    The 'reputation' that you seek to 'change' is one of a deceitful playa.