UDreamOfJanie

Dream a Little Dream of Me.

Who The Hell Is This Idiot?

BatBoyWonder’s Blog.


It’s pretty much “blah blah blah…Morphodyke knows what she’s talking about…blah blah Tribune7 has a life…blah blah, JanieBelle and Kate are lesbos and naked is bad….blah blah”

On MorphoDyke:

She whines that O’Leary isn’t glued to her computer to reply to her personal attacks on her by complaining she “stood up to the self-loathing loud-mouthed women” on the board and will leave now. I mean, when you post 5 comments in a row in a short period of time, others might not have been AROUND to reply. Here’s a clue- maybe no one came back to the post yet?

Get a clue. She’s a fundy mouthpiece with the brain of an insect. Do you actually read the drivel you’re slobbering over? Check the timestamps just prior. They all had lots to say in a short amount of time, then suddenly disappeared when I spoke up and challenged the spooge dripping from MorphoDyke’s lips.

On Josh Bozeman Tribune7:

Act like a child, be called out as a child. Janiebelle- you ever think Tribune7 maybe left the computer. Maybe he/she has better things to do than to argue with a child?

The little boy lives in his mother’s basement, spends his time reading my blog and yanking his sausage. The entire conversation on my blog took place while he was constantly refreshing the page at intervals of less than one minute. The Sitemeter (affectionately referred to here as blogometer) tells me exactly how many pages a visitor views, and when the last click was. He was being fed his responses by somebody else, by email. Rather obvious. He was evasive and had nothing to say other than evangelization propaganda. Trust me, he has NOTHING better to do.

On sex and nudity:

So, some fool comes out and attacks O’Leary (janiebelle her username is- on her site she argues that monogamy might not be good…she points out she’s a lesbian with “no sexual preference,” and one can assume she’s fairly radical feminist as well from her writings.

and later…

Now, it’s obvious from this post alone that JanieBelle and her lesbian love “Corporal Kate” are some strange people to say the least (just read the sex post from Janiebelle about how it was fine as a kid to walk around naked with her parents),…

Do you shower with your clothes on?

I really hope you’re not implying something untoward about my parents. That would not be a very intelligent statement to make, legally speaking. Name calling is one thing, but when you imply someone is a pedophile, that’s quite another. Perhaps if you weren’t so freaked out about nudity you’d get laid, which might do wonders for your worldview. You know, you give a very similar impression as the Bozinator.

Just so y’know.

In the event you erase my response to your bleatings at your little one-post Javisonesque blog, I reproduce it here in full:

You really have issues with being naked, don’t you? You should see a shrink about that. Spend more time in his office, less time whacking your weenie while reading my blog, then feeling guilty about it.

As for Bozeman, he never left the computer, he was sitting there refreshing the page, as shown by the sitemeter. It was pretty obvious that he was being fed his “arguments” by email. He couldn’t say two words without taking five minutes to do it. Is there one person who does all the thinking for you people? If so, you should all trade her in for a better model.

Fundies. Dumb as a whole box o rocks.

Filed under: Corporal Kate, Fundies, Rants, Religion, Sex

71 Responses

  1. Josh Bozeman says:

    nice. someone forwarded this link to me. interesting stuff.

    i have a feeling you might be off your rocker. 1. you link to some site that has an issue with you- but that person is not me. i have my own website that i post to all the time. if i have something to say on any issue- including you, i will post it there. so, whoever posted about you is some stranger (clearly a stranger to both of us).

    next reason youre a bit off ios the fact that i never commented on your site. someone who frequents UD mentioned your page to me, i visited maybe 3 times to see the lame argument between you and tribune7. which brings us to the last point- i am not tribune7. i havent posted to UD in many months, and i never posted under the username tribune7. that person, i believe, still comments at UD.

    finally, i dont live in my mothers basement, as my mother just passed away. thatd probably be really difficult to do. it might also be difficult to do whatever it is you say i do with my sausage on your site, as i was at your site for a total of maybe 5 mins? dont worry- kids with no civility, like yourself, arent much of a problem.

    anyhoo- i guess 4 out of 4 wrong is about as close to clueless as you can get. for future reference- if i have anything to say to you or about you, i wont hide behind a phony username, and ill be sure to let you know i said what i have to say. i always post to websites with MY name. this might let you down a teeny bit, but you dont intimidate me, nor do you bother me. but really, you should try to at least get your facts straight from now on. you argued with someone (tribune7) for days, thinking it was me. this all makes you look childish, petty, and downright ignorant.

  2. Josh Bozeman says:

    btw- whoever wonderbatboy is- i dont see anywhere this person mentioning me. so ive no idea where you get my name from. and im not sure who you think this person is. id assume its possibly the same person as tribuine7 or someone tribune knows? ive no idea either was, as ive never talked to this person, only seen his/her comments at UD.

    also- my last comment was directed at whoever thinks i commented on their site. whoever runs this blog? im not even sure- 2 females as far as i can tell.

    after re-reading your piost, i was somewhat confused. i assuem you think you were arguing with me, in which case- what i said stands. i didnt comment, im not tribune7, and i dont know who tribune7 is. davescot himself can tell you- he banned me from UD. i havent posted since that banning a number of months ago. tribune7 started posting even before i did, i believe.

    like i said- you should try to get your facts straight as to who youre arguing with. and when you insult someone, their mother, whoever else- make sure youre attacking the correct person. its just silly to have someone fwd me a link where my name is mentioned, tho ive never talked to you in my life. maybe wonderboy has a problem with what you do, how you live, your parents, etc. but i couldnt care any less, as i dont even know you. you can do whatever you want with your life, thats great.

    im going back to work now. unlike wonderboy i have a full time job and im going back to it. i do have better things to do, contrary to what you said about me. then again, who can blame you when you thought i was tribune7 who had a lot more time on his or her hands.

  3. JanieBelle says:

    Well ain’t that a kick in the pants. Funny he was coming in from Evansville, Indiana. Sound familiar, at all?

    And for someone who’s so above board and all, you went to all the trouble of hiding your ISP this time around.

    I am sorry to hear about your mom, though. No sarcasm, real sympathy. I would be devastated myself. I can’t even imagine what that that must be like.

    I must say that this comment is certainly much more lucid than tribune7’s stuff, so it is perhaps possible that he’s just one of your homeys.

    I don’t believe in coincidences. In any event, my comments stand toward tribune7, whether he is you or not.

    If you are not him, then I humbly apologize.

    I still think otherwise, but hey, it’s a free country.

  4. Josh Bozeman says:

    janiebelle- i visited your site 3 times i think. i didnt post a comment. i actually dont have any male friends who live in the city of evansville. I MYSELF am from evansville. have a feeling you saw evansville and THOUGHT it coincided with tribune7. then again, it probably DID coincide with his comments. many people can visit a site at the same time, and youve no idea which person is commenting and which isnt.

    i went to no trouble to conceal my identity when visiting your site. i visited your page from home. im visiting your page from a wireless connection away from home. i have a hunch youre confused. tribune7 isnt me, hes not a buddy of mine, whatever else. i have no idea how my name even got involved with this entire situation to begin with!

  5. JanieBelle says:

    After careful thought and consideration (not really, but it sounded good) I have to at least give you credit for this, Josh:

    You went two whole sentences without trying to save my soul. I’m not sure Tribune7 could have accomplished such a feat.

    Without help, anyway.

  6. JanieBelle says:

    Actually, I know exactly who is commenting as soon as they click the “post a comment” link. It’s an outclick, and shows up on the sitemeter.

    Thanks for playing, though.

  7. JanieBelle says:

    As for not concealing…

    There are currently 6 people who have been reading my blog in the last 20 minutes.

    Gonesse, Ile-de-France
    Troy, New York
    Albuquerque, New Mexico
    Bronx, New York
    Toronto, Ontario
    Frankfurt, Hessen

    Not a single one from anywhere near Evansville.

    Just so y’know.

  8. JanieBelle says:

    Your name got attached because Tribune7 was commenting from Evansville, IN, and was spouting a bunch of Jesus crap.

    It wasn’t a great leap.

  9. Josh Bozeman says:

    sorry janie. thats not how sitemeter works. even the paid version wont give you ALL the info you need. i say this as ive used it for nearly 5 years on my own website. if numerous people are on your site reading a certain post, it wont show what they did at every second. it wont show they they clicked submit a comment. it wont always show every link they visit from your site to an external site or even another page on your own site.

    like i said- if i comment to you (as im doing right now) i will use my actual name. if not, i will use my blogger name, which is joshbozeman i believe (dont use blogger much.) why would i argue with you about someone i dont know, then come back and reply with my name. on top of that- tribune7 posted at UD before i did. and at the same time i did.

    if tribune was saying bad things about me- then im on your side. because i dont know this person, and people who dont know me probably shouldnt be talking nonsense about me. if he didnt (i dont know who he is, or if hes the one who posted this link you have), then whatever, he didnt and thats fine.

    as for saving your soul, i dont have any idea what youre talking about.

    as for concealing my identity. i dont know what sitemeter shows at any given time for your site. im on a wireless network that routes through various locations in the US depending on the day, time of day, etc. thats what im told about this place. i dont know how it all works, but it works- thats all i do know. im using someone elses laptop (dont even own a laptop, tho i wish i did)…it might be something they have set in their browser for all i know. i could always ask them when they return.

  10. Josh Bozeman says:

    sorry to hear he was spouting “jesus crap.” i have little desire to do that, especially to people who dont care to hear it. every person has to make their own decisions in life.

    as for his commenting, my comments above this refer to that. sitemeter isnt as accurate or timed out properly as i think you think it is. its a fairly poor way to really track visitors, where they clink, their length of time, etc etc. i dont use it to get detailed stats, as my own tests show that its often inaccurate. sometimes it will show a page view of 30 mins when i visit my own site for a half a second or two. you get what you DONT pay for though, but it works as a free service i guess.

    if you had a domain, id recommend you use a webstats platform the host would offer, but you dont see that option is out. then again, i need detailed state every once in a while to figure out certain site-related issues, ads, content, etc.

    anyway- thanks for the condolences. sorry im not your nemesis tribune. and sorry i dont know the guy/girl myself.

  11. JanieBelle says:

    Well, as I said, you certainly seem more lucid than tribune7 could ever manage.

    As for sitemeter, it actually will tell me who commented. It keeps track of “outclicks”. If you click a link on my blog that takes you to another site, it records it and keeps track of the last one for any given commenter.

    Since the “post a comment” page is actually at blogger.com and not udoj.blogspot.com, that’s an outclick and it’s recorded.

    Just so y’know.

    I’ve corrected my original post with a strikethrough to indicate my comments are aimed at Tribune7, regardless of who his is, but without dishonestly removing the indication that they were originally directed specifically you.

  12. Josh says:

    i know that the blogger page is an outclick. but, a person can click the links page and it will show the same as a comment. youd have to try to find the times and get them together to match the comment to an IP address. someone could click ‘comments’ to reach just the comments paghe to follow the conversation, and it might look as if that person clicked to make a comment. its easier to find out when you have sitemeter on all pages and then match them with the exact timing of each comment with each exact timing of the clicks. then again- free services like sitemeter, as i mentioned, arent always the most accurate in timings, lengths of visits, pageviews, hits, visitors, etc. sometimes it might be spot on, sometimes it might be way off for no known reason you can figure out. it can sometimes get frustrating. worse if you try to match your sitemeter data with webstats or another free service you might use. and sometimes they show different data.

    i dont know if you can do this- i dont play around with blogger much- but if possible, id add the sitemeter code to EVERY page. even the comment page if it will allow you to edit it. it tends to better track users and where they go all over the site to a link back to the homepage, and all of that stuff. i used to have sitemeter in my root code that would go site-wide with every page that was added automatically. then i switched to a new blog software, not sure its like that anymore.

    if you can tho, add sitemeter to every page, comments page, main page, individual entries, etc. then you can track a specific IP as they go through every page you have the meter on.

  13. JanieBelle says:

    Wow, batshitboy is up to three comments on his single post blog.

    Of course one is blipey’s and the other two are mine.

    For posterity:

    # blipey Says:
    August 8th, 2006 at 3:09 pm

    You do realize your post starts out with no background info? What exactly is it that O’Leary has studied? Where’s the link to allow us to look for ourselves? What’s the big deal?

    # JanieBelle and Kate Says:
    August 8th, 2006 at 7:28 pm

    Just by way of correction (possibly) to my own comment…

    Josh Bozeman denies he’s Tribune7.

    blipey, are you suggesting that a fundy whackjob would take a few comments out of context and publicly twist the situation in order to present it in an inaccurate light????

    Somebody call 911! Things are perfectly normal!!!

  14. JanieBelle says:

    No, Josh. Click the comments link on the home page. It will take you to udoj.blogspot.com/whateverpost.html#comments.

    I edited the template to do that. That isn’t an outclick.

    I can, however, see the repeatedly updated outclicks to the post a comment page by the same person, at the same time a comment gets posted.

    It ain’t rocket science. When there are two people commenting, me and him, and 20 people are reading a page that ends in .html#comments, and one is outclicking to blogger.com/publish-comment…..

    The sitemeter is, in fact, on all pages that begin with udoj.blogspot.com/

    Pay attention.

    I can’t edit the blogger pages, or it would be there, too.

    Any other wacky ideas about why Tribune7 wasn’t in Evansville?

    Methinks you doth protest too much.

  15. Josh Bozeman says:

    ah. btw. i see what youre problem is. sometimes a person might click POST COMMENT to see the comments in a single box. i often do this with blogger, because its on a white background and often times easier to see because of how its formatted. just because someone clicks post a comment doesnt mean they will leave one. in the future, try to pin down clicks and time them with the comment timestamps. that way you dont get confused when people click POST COMMENT just to VIEW the comments page in a seperate window.

    blogger doesnt have an option to record the IP of each person who comments? i use livejournal sometimes and i know it has that option to do just that. weird that blogger doesnt (or so it seems).

  16. Josh Bozeman says:

    janie. youre conflating someone clicking the post a comment button with someone actually POSTING a comment. theres no meter on THIS page (the page where the comments are listed next to the open submission box for comments.) one could come to THIS page itself and stay on it all day without the user knowing.

    like i said- not everyone who hits post a comment actually leaves one. many times, my users will go to my comment page itself (which is inside an individual entry) just to follow the conversation in the comments section.

    im not protesting at all. if you think im tribune thats fine. im not, but if you think i am- you can think so. ive been running a few websites for over 7 yrs now, so i was giving you some info. on how you can easily conflate a user clicking a page without taking the action the page is meant for.

  17. JanieBelle says:

    Did. Pay attention for Pete’s sake. I’m not an idiot.

    1. One person, exactly one (sitemeter ignores my IP) was outclicking to the blogger.com/post a comment page.

    2. The sitemeter is exactly 4 minutes off from my computer clock, I account for that.

    3. Each time that person outclicked, there would shortly thereafter appear a comment by Tribune7, time stamped WITH THE SAME TIME AS THE OUTCLICK. A comment gets stamped with the time you get to the comment page, not the post time.

    4. The ONE single, only person clicking the blogger page was in Evansville, IN.

    There are no problems for you to see, Josh.

    It’s pretty freakin’ simple.

  18. JanieBelle says:

    READ MY LIPS! IT’S AN OUTCLICK. WHEN SOMEONE GOES BACK TO THE COMMENTS PAGE, AND THEN CLICKS BACK TO THE POST A COMMENT PAGE, THE SITEMETER RECORDS IT.

    THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT TRIBUNE7 WAS DOING, GET IT?

    HIS POSTED COMMENT TIMES MATCHED THE OUTCLICK TIMES.

    Jesus Christ, you’re dense.

  19. Josh Bozeman says:

    lol. you have issues, i see.

    you saw EVANSVILLE on your sitemeter. someone can come from evansville and STAY ON THIS PAGE IM AT RIGHT NOW. there is no site meter on THIS PAGE. one can post a comment THEN FOLLOW ALONG WITHOUT LEAVING THIS PAGE.

    this is PRECISELY WHAT IM DOING NOW, as theres no need to go back to your main page. sitemeter DOES NOT show this, as theres no meter on THIS submission page.

    i get that you dont quite understand this process, but you really should try to act like an adult. i dont know what the hell tribune7 did, im telling you HOW you can see a city related to an IP on your sitemeter and see that same IP click POST A COMMENT without them ACTUALLY POSTINT A COMMENT. good lord.

  20. JanieBelle says:

    janie. youre conflating someone clicking the post a comment button with someone actually POSTING a comment.

    I’m not conflating anything. I understand what you are saying, and I agree. That’s not what was happening.

    What’s happening now is you’re assuming I don’t know what I’m talking about because I’m a girl. That makes you an asshole of the first order.

    I almost believed that it was just a strange coincidence that Tribune7 was from your hometown.

    My sanity returned.

    this is PRECISELY WHAT IM DOING NOW, as theres no need to go back to your main page. sitemeter DOES NOT show this, as theres no meter on THIS submission page.

    Yes, dicknose, I know that. That is NOT what Tribune7 was doing.

  21. JanieBelle says:

    Stop. Reread what I’m telling you.

    Tribune7 did NOT just stay on this page.

    Tribune7 returned to what was then a black page. There he would sit, refreshing the page. Then he would click back here to comment. After he would comment, he went BACK TO THE BLACK PAGE.

    Get it now?

  22. Josh Bozeman says:

    youre hysterical. its actually sort of funny. IM COMMENTING on your site RIGHT NOW. i dont give a flying rats butt if you know my name or not.

    1. you dont know me, you pulled my name out of think air. actually, i have a feeling you saw evansville in the sitemeter once, then got confused and thought tribune7 was me, (that got stuck in your head and you ran with it) and then talked to davescot and he says- oh, thats this guy.

    2. again. im commenting on your site this second. why hide my name before when im not now? if i want to debate you, ill do so with my own name. i do it everyday in my own site. whatd i suddely become shy?

    3. i dont care about saving your soul. thats not my job. you think i was posting to your site under a phony name and pretending to be concerned about your soul?whats next, maybe a conspiracy theory where you claim i commented and pretended to be a rabbi or maybe a jehovas witness begging you to come to the kingdom hall?

    4. YOU are the one who mentioned me by name and then proceded to make a fool of yourself by thinking i was tribune and attacking me, bringing up my mother and whatever else, etc. mistakenly claimg i was commenting (when i never did) and doing graphic things while doing so.

    5. you clearly dont understand how sitemeter works. ive been on your site for about an hr, and ive NEVER left this page here. no meter on this page, thus no IP to even show up. its like talking to a brick wall. i was trying to help you understand that MANY users will NEVER SHOW up on your sitemeter, as they will bookmark THIS page and never leave it.

    id suggest a vacation. some drugs. something to loosen you up. maybe youd be less likely to fly off the handle attacking others, callinbg names, and whatever else.

  23. Josh Bozeman says:

    are you truly out of your mind? i was under the impression this was a new site. no one said you were stupid or couldnt understand sitemeter. no one said anything bad about women at all! youre not only quick to fly off the handle and attack, youre also paranoid as all hell.

    i havent left this page. theres no need! why would anyone keep going back to a page when the conversation is on THIS page? if tribune kept going back to your site, good for him. i find it a waste of time to go back and forth when all the comments are right here and a refresh click will bring it all back up and pop up the new comments.

    like i said before- take a vacation, or some drugs, because youre acting like a child. “dicknose” ?? are you kidding me? all because youre some paranoid person who thinks im someone im not and i wanted to save your soul? whew. and to think i was trying to be polite and mention a few things about sitemeter not everyone knows, especially people with NEW websites. men AND women.

  24. JanieBelle says:

    Actually, I mentioned to someone in an email during the conversation that Tribune7 was in Evansville. I’d never heard of your dumb ass until I got an answer saying “well that’s Bozeman”.

    Dave has never said one way or the other, leave him out of it. Near as I can remember, your name has never come up in any conversation between him and me. Don’t flatter yourself, you’re not that important.

    Yes, I’M AWARE YOU NEVER LEFT THIS PAGE. AGAIN, BECAUSE I’M A GIRL DOESN’T MEAN I’M AN IDIOT. WHAT YOU ARE DOING NOW IS NOT WHAT TRIBUNE7 WAS DOING.

    I’ll explain it to you one more time.

    Idiot Tribune7 came to my home page. He then went to the comments page, which is now gray, but was then black.

    Are you with me so far?

    He then outclicked to this ugly pink page and posted a comment.

    He then WENT BACK TO THE BLACK PAGE AND CONTINUED TO REFRESH THE PAGE AT INTERVALS OF LESS THAN ONE MINUTE. Had he not done that, he would have fallen off the list of current active users after 20 minutes. Yet, each time I refreshed that page, there was a brand new “last click” time.

    Then, HE WOULD AGAIN OUTCLICK TO THIS GOD AWEFUL PINK PAGE AND COMMENT, only to return to the black page and continue to refresh.

    I am quite well aware of how sitemeter works.

    You simply can’t grasp what was going on, and you can’t understand that a girl knows anything about computers.

    Now, do you get it? I can’t really explain it any simpler.

  25. JanieBelle says:

    why would anyone keep going back to a page when the conversation is on THIS page?

    I do it myself all the time. This is the single ugliest, most annoying page on the world wide web. I don’t care to see it any more than I have to, and as soon as I figure out how, I’m going to eliminate the need to see it at all on my blog.

    You are not a dicknose because I’m paranoid, or even because I think that you and Tribune7 share a pair of tighty whiteys.

    You are a dicknose because you refuse to even listen to what I’m telling you.

    TRIBUNE7 DID NOT REMAIN ON THIS PAGE. He went back and forth to the black comments page.

    You ASSUMED I didn’t know what I was talking about and then proceeded to condescendingly explain to me how sitemeter works.

    THAT SIR, IS WHY YOU ARE A DICKNOSE.

  26. Josh Bozeman says:

    [[[4. The ONE single, only person clicking the blogger page was in Evansville, IN.]]]

    like i said- i havent left this page. when i post a comment or series or comments to ANY blogger site, i stay on the comments page. this is what ive done this whole time, as you can attest to via sitemeter not showing any new clicks, visitors, or hits. tribune, if he/she did that, great for him/her. i havent, and i wont go back to the main page. thats pointless. unless you decide to post comments replying to these on the main page, WHY go back at all?

    cool out. enjoy life a bit more. dont be so paranoid. dont think that someone mentioning a few sitemeter bits of data is out to get women all of a sudden. i mean, geez.

    and again- PLEASE stop being so paranoid. i have a hunch youve got some issue with being a woman, as you keep attacking me saying that im attacking women. i never said anything about women! not once did i say anything about women not being able to use computers ro anything else. im merely pointing out to you, why the hell would i post to your site here and keep going back and forth before, using a penname, and pretending to be some soul saving evangelical out to get you to christ, then come back to post with my real name, not interested in saving your soul (your life is YOUR decision), and then stay on this single page.

    youre convinced theres a major conspiracy out to get you. maybe out to get all women? come on! go buy a bottle of wine for the love of god. youll have a heart attack with all your anger and paranoia.

  27. Josh Bozeman says:

    sorry janie. youre confused once more. I UNDERSTAND what tribune did, according to you. my point was- i have a feeling you saw evansville on the sitemeter, then saw an outclick to the submit a comment page. then conflated the two and thought you were arguing with me the entire time. i can assure you, you were not.

    YOUR SITE IS NEW, thus youve probably been using sitemeter for a limited period. ive been using it many many yrs. when someone who has been using something for yrs gives a tip you MIGHT NOT know, dont take it as an attack. if you went to a new job, would you be offended if the guy who had been there 10 yrs explained something to you after you had been there a week? its common for people who have used something for many yrs to give tips, in the POSSIBILITY that you didnt realize whatever it is being talked about. thats not an attack on you, or on women.

    for someone who thinks that a man shouldnt talk down to a woman (something I NEVER did), you sure do call a lot of names. you seem to be filled with a lot of anger and hatred for someone who demands such respect, equality, kindness, and whatever else.

  28. JanieBelle says:

    It is your condescension that pisses me off, Josh. Not whether or not you are or are not Tribune7.

    At this point, I don’t even care if you’re Jesus H. Christ.

    You were not listening to what I was trying to explain, you were assuming, as you have yet again, that I saw Evansville, saw one single outclick, and put 2 and 2 together and came up with 5.

    I assure you, your assumption is incorrect.

    Once again, if that were actually the case, Evansville would have fallen off the sitemeter active user page after 20 minutes.

    It did not. Evansville continued to refresh the page for several hours, as I recall, though it may have been less than two. It was, in any case, for the duration of the time in which the conversation took place.

    I don’t know how many other ways to explain it to you.

    Now, as for anger, I’m usually only pissed off when someone attacks me. Or when they assume I’m an idiot.

    When you began to pontificate on the proper use of sitemeter, that’s exactly what you did. You didn’t give a rats ass what I had to say, because YOU ASSUMED I WAS WRONG without listening.

    Now why would you do that?

    also- my last comment was directed at whoever thinks i commented on their site. whoever runs this blog? im not even sure- 2 females as far as i can tell.

    ’nuff said?

  29. JanieBelle says:

    YOUR SITE IS NEW, thus youve probably been using sitemeter for a limited period.

    It ain’t rocket science Josh, and I certainly don’t need a Doctorate in Biology to use sitemeter.

    if you went to a new job, would you be offended if the guy who had been there 10 yrs explained something to you after you had been there a week? its common for people who have used something for many yrs to give tips, in the POSSIBILITY that you didnt realize whatever it is being talked about. thats not an attack on you, or on women.

    There was no “possibility” involved. You were certain that I didn’t know what I was talking about, and refused to even acknowlege what I was telling you. There was no “hey, are you sure that you didn’t…?” It was right from the starting gate, “you just don’t know how to use a very basic web tool”.

    Your assumption that I was wrong was right out of the box from square one, and your reason behind that assumption is offensive, at best.

  30. JanieBelle says:

    It’s also quite typical of bible-thumpers.

  31. Josh says:

    no. it was based on the fact that you think im tribune7, contrary to the fact that i care less if you see my name and have posted numerous times today with my name. and even my url! its based on the fact that since you confused tribune with me and my city- then maybe you didnt understand that because sonmeone clicks comment doesnt mean that they DID actually comment.

    thats the reason. not because youre female. though, surely youre paranoid mind will think its because youre a woman, as you suddenly lashed out with that, though i never said anything about women.

    since you confused tribune with me and argued with him as though he was me, thats reason enough to think its possible you dont know all the things in sitemeter. which is rather funny, as this all started because of your obvious confusion in sitemeter, linking me to someone im not, then you attacking me by calling me names, claiming i live with my mother (who just died for heavens sake), and the rest.

    do your research next time. before you attack, make sure youre not completely confused (as you are, as you have proven here.) good luck finding out who tribune7 is- if you want, i can post to UD and ask him to contact you. have a great day! i wont stoop to calling names i last heard in jr high school, so. cheers!

  32. JanieBelle says:

    also- my last comment was directed at whoever thinks i commented on their site. whoever runs this blog? im not even sure- 2 females as far as i can tell.

    So this comment was also from someone impersonating you?

    You might want to re-examine who’s paranoid in this conversation.

  33. JanieBelle says:

    That’s better, now you’re starting to sound more like Tribune7.

    See that you’re completely wrong and avoid the issue and run away.

    Whatever doubts anyone might have had are quite dispelled.

    buh bye.

  34. JanieBelle says:

    Just couldn’t be possible that I’m right, could it?

    It would tear a rip in the fabric of your reality to say “you know, perhaps I may have came off sounding more pompous than I intended”.

    Uh-uh, no way.

    “She’s a FEMALE! I been doin’ this for ten years! I’m MALE! I CAN’T be wrong.”

  35. JanieBelle says:

    Was there any particular reason you logged out of your blogger account, by the way?

    Just curious.

  36. JanieBelle says:

    Just for the record, does anyone else find the following interesting?

    i visited maybe 3 times to see the lame argument between you and tribune7. which brings us to the last point- i am not tribune7.

    Very next comment…

    so ive no idea where you get my name from…davescot himself can tell you- he banned me from UD.

    As the excuses became clearly useless…

    you dont know me, you pulled my name out of think [sic] air….and then talked to davescot and he says- oh, thats this guy.

    And then finally,

    if you want, i can post to UD and ask him to contact you.

    So much for the “no motive” argument.

  37. josh says:

    umm. seriously, are you crazy? i just want to know. because, i sort of had to go back to work, as i worked 12 hours total today. i never logged into any account, i was posting as OTHER where you can put your name and URL. i simply got tired of typing it all in everytime.

    so, when someone has to leave to get back to their job, they MUST be tribune? my comment about asking him to contact you was sarcasm you clearly didnt get. as for the rest of your comments, im not even sure what you were talking about, so i cant really reply to much of it.

    i assumed from seeing you type a post to davescot that he said it was me who came to your page. i did come to your page, this is my first time ever commenting. no one else you talk to should know me, but clearly you know all sorts of people who think they know me.

    once again, no one said anything about any differences between men and women. ive been using sitemeter for 6 or 7 yrs. youve been using it what? 6 or 7 months from the looks of how old the page is. it has nothing to do with your sex. again, youre paranoid. very paranoid. all men hate women and are out to get you. lock the doors! sorry, im not part of the conspiracy you think exists.

    finally- as i said before- i assumed you were confused about sitemeter because you claim that someone from evansville visited your site all day long, refreshing your main post page. and that the times were the same as the comments. since ive never commented, and you have me mistaken for tribune7, THAT is why i know youre confused about sitemeter. on top of all of that, i also know youre confused, because i left this page open (the submission/comments only page) when i went back to do the rest of my work. when i came back here, i left it open. thus, you wouldnt have seen me refreshing all day long, as i dont go to the main page. its pretty simple.

    if i recall correctly, the argument with tribune started ON UD and then continued here. like i said, ask your pal dave- he will confirm that i was banned and had been banned for months. maybe tribune does exist, and he IS someone else, but then i saw the comments and decided to call MYSELF tribune and post here at your site! fortunately, ive got better things to do than follow comments from one site, take them to another and pretend to be someone else. last time i posted to UD was at least 4 months ago, probably longer. i think, from what i saw, your argument on UD with tribune was more recent.

    now im off to finish some work around the house. cant sit on the computer all day as you expect one to do (else that proves im tribune, because he left himself).

  38. JanieBelle says:

    Ok, bored with you.

    buh bye.

  39. Well, Janie, you’re right. BatBoyWonder is an idiot. I read through his post and was less than impressed. It was rambling and full of argumentative holes, and he ended up just calling you names (gee, don’t I remember him making some comment about those who rely on nothing but insults?).

    And Mr. Bozeman, for someone who claims to spend all their time working and needed to go back to work, you sure seem to have spent a lot of time here . . .

    Oh yeah, that bit about being routed through numerous IPs through the day, most half-way decent IP trackers can trace it back to the original location (and before you get pissy, I checked on this with a couple of friends who make their livings as network admins and tech – both of them women by the way). Hell, my firewall software can do that to a limited extent.

  40. DaveScot says:

    Josh!

    You giant cunt! How’s it going? I’d call you a prick but that’s too masculine. I’d call you a little girl but that’s an insult to little girls. Pussy is close but it just doesn’t quite convey the proper amount of contempt if you know what I mean and I think you do.

  41. DaveScot says:

    Josh is right about me banning him. He was close to the first! Tribune7 can’t be him unless he got a new IP address. I caught Josh “The Cunt” Bozeman in several guises by his IP address. Josh was guilty of way too much bible thumping. I can only give so much leeway to a book written 2000 years ago by lice ridden beduins, after all. Especially after 9/11. Everyone knows those Arab beduins are a bunch of liars that like buggering camels and young boys but won’t admit it.

  42. blipey says:

    This post has been removed by the author.

  43. blipey says:

    Good lord! I forgot to hold off the stuff that sounds like…holy shit-eating, flying fuck-a-licious, douche bags!

    This thread has become too stupid to read. And that’s saying a lot as the Science, What Is, and Open Letter threads all had there really stupid moments.

  44. DaveScot says:

    Jesus Christ, you’re dense.

    JanieBelle McKnight you stop calling Jesus dense right this minute! Shame on you. Just because he was a lice ridden beduin doesn’t mean he was dense.

  45. blipey says:

    Everyone knows those Arab beduins are a bunch of liars that like buggering camels and young boys but won’t admit it.

    You’ve got to be kidding me. That’s nice, DaveScot. Anyone ever tell you you’re a jackass?

    Besides me, that is.

  46. LeperColony says:

    Wow, you have people who dedicate entire posts on their blogs to ranting about yours?

    I must say, I’m a little jealous.

  47. JanieBelle says:

    Wow, where were all you guys when Freak Show boy was here earlier?

    I just got awakened by a certain somebody snoring so loud I think the windows rattled, and thought I’d come check the blog.

    I’ll guess I should start with Rogue Historian and work down…

    Well, Janie, you’re right.

    Well of course I am, silly. I’m a goddess!

    🙂

    (You do understand I’m kidding, right? I don’t want to upset anybody else. I think I’ve done enough of that lately.)

    And Mr. Bozeman, for someone who claims to spend all their time working and needed to go back to work, you sure seem to have spent a lot of time here . . .

    And for someone who doesn’t care what I think, as well.

    most half-way decent IP trackers can trace it back to the original location

    I’m not really that interested, Rogue. I’m usually just curious as to which of my regulars, like you, are around, how many people are reading and what’s interesting them.

    When someone new comments, I usually like to know where they’re from. Not that it matters all that much, just more like “oh look, Kansas City is on, and he’s looking at the Mudhole thread”. Actually, most of my regular readers have never commented here, which is interesting all by itself.

    Anyway, the long and the short of it is that Tribune7 showed up as Evansville, IN, and someone pointed me to Josh. I had never even heard of Josh. I mentioned during the conversation that I was sorry to hear his bunny died. (From a comment on Josh Bozeman’s blog. I peeked in to do see who he was.) Tribune7 never denied his bunny died, and he never denied his name was Josh when I addressed him as such.

    Given that DaveScot, a few comments below yours, informs us that Tribune7 cannot be Bozeman, we may all be victims of something a bit more deliberate than it at first appears.

    Does anyone know of a way to spoof a particular town? Surely it couldn’t be impossible.

    Of course, Josh is still an ass for coming in here and assuming I’m an idiot. Though I explained to him several times that Evansville IN was repeatedly refreshing the black page, and jumping back and forth to the pink page, his continued response was “you’re confused”.

    No Josh, I am not confused, you are an ass.

  48. JanieBelle says:

    Dave,

    I’m going to address your comments in two parts.

    I’m with you in the first comment. However, I think you’ve been spending too much time at DAJ’s blog. Your impressions of him are way too accurate.

    🙂

    Tribune7 can’t be him unless he got a new IP address.

    Fair enough. Another explanation is that Tribune7 was deliberately routing himself through Evansville (if that’s possible, I assume it is) in order to appear to be Josh.

    I have no idea why he would do that, and he certainly didn’t impress me as someone with enough intelligence or savvy to do such a thing. On the other hand, he may have been taking advantage of a fortuitous error with the blogometer.

    In any event, he chose not to deny being Josh, or having a bunny. That makes him just as much of a liar whether he’s actually Josh pretending not to be, or not Josh and pretending to be.

    And Josh is still an arrogant, pompous ass.

    Now as to the second part of your second comment.

    Knock it off. I’m no fan of that most overrated book of bedtime stories, and I’m no fan of people who base their lives on it, or it’s various spin-offs.

    But I’ll not tolerate disparaging racist generalizations, not from anybody, even you. Your remark about Arabs was over the line.

    Thanks.

  49. JanieBelle says:

    Blipey,

    Point well made. Both points, actually.

    I am at least as guilty as anyone else on both counts.

    Lets ALL try to at least keep the swears to the minor ones, just to avoid lectures from my Mother.

    Further, the stupid monster really has been running rampant on this thread. I’m not going to close it for now, but I think we ALL need to reign it in again.

  50. JanieBelle says:

    Dave, comment the third.

    Very funny, but see my previous comment about the “lice ridden beduins”.

    Sometimes I say the damnedest things when I don’t proofread my comments to death.

  51. JanieBelle says:

    blipey, comment the second.

    I think I’ve addressed that issue already, so I’m skipping further comment.

    Just didn’t want you to think I was ignoring it.

  52. JanieBelle says:

    leper colony

    Wow, you have people who dedicate entire posts on their blogs to ranting about yours?

    I must say, I’m a little jealous.

    It’s worse than that, I’m afraid. His entire blog consists of one post, and it’s a rant about my blog.

    So really, his WHOLE BLOG is about me.

    In a way, you should be REALLY jealous of me.

    🙂

    On the other hand, you might better just fear for my safety.

  53. JanieBelle says:

    Let me just amend that last statement…

    Dave got a passing mention and insult in the first little bit of the post.

    Just in the interest of giving credit where credit is due.

    Kisses to you all and good night,
    JanieBelle

  54. JanieBelle says:

    RogueHistorian on BatBoyWonder’s blog…

    You attack others as “arrogant idiots” yet somehow, you come off looking more like an idiot than JanieBelle.

    ummm.. thanks?

    With friends like mine, who needs enemies???

    🙂

    Kisses

  55. DaveScot says:

    I called the authors of the bible “lice ridden beduins” on Uncommon Descent. It really set Josh off. And it’s true. I thought everyone knew that Arabs do their camels. It’s not racist. It’s a simple fact. But hey, if you don’t want disparaging remarks about terrorists that want to kill everyone in the U.S. and/or make us all stick our ass up in the air opposite Mecca to worship Allah then I guess that’s your call. Is that what you’re saying?

  56. DaveScot says:

    You should read this whilst keeping mind that Jordanians are Arabs. I’m not making this up. Arab men are pigs, dear. Misogynous pigs at that. At the least you should know who you’re defending and ask if they deserve it. Arab isn’t a race, by the way, it’s a culture and a part of the world centered on the Middle East, so it’s really not possible to be racist against Arabs. That would be like being racist against Canadian morphodykes – non sequitur.

    http://www.etan.org/et2005/march/20/26hushed.htm

  57. JanieBelle says:

    I called the authors of the bible “lice ridden beduins” on Uncommon Descent. It really set Josh off. And it’s true.

    Accurate as far as it goes, perhaps, but about as useful as “flea infested medieval Englishmen”, which is to say not at all.

    Of course, anything that pisses off Josh can’t be all bad…

    I thought everyone knew that Arabs do their camels. It’s not racist.

    Wow. Linking to an incident where two Jordanians injure their penises (peni?) attempting to get freaky with their goat and then extrapolating to the entire population of Jordanian men is the same as linking to an incident where two Marines rape and kill a twelve year old girl and extrapolating to all Marines.

    It’s a stupid statement, through and through.

    But hey, if you don’t want disparaging remarks about terrorists that want to kill everyone in the U.S. and/or make us all stick our ass up in the air opposite Mecca to worship Allah then I guess that’s your call. Is that what you’re saying?

    I said nothing about terrorists in particular, I said Arabs in general. I can’t even begin to address the dishonesty in that statement. You are attacking a position I do not hold, and one which I never even came close to implying.

    Arab men are pigs, dear. Misogynous pigs at that.

    While I’m not any sort of fan of Middle Eastern culture’s misogyny, you are conflating men of a particular culture with men of a particular ethnic background.

    Arab isn’t a race, by the way, it’s a culture and a part of the world centered on the Middle East, so it’s really not possible to be racist against Arabs.

    Both Wikipedia and common usage would disagree.

    That would be like being racist against Canadian morphodykes – non sequitur.

    On the one hand this statement holds a grain of truth. It’s not possible to be racist against Canadian MorphoDykes.

    On the other, the implication (that I don’t really think you intended) is that I hold a grudge against Canadian MorphoDykes in general.

    I’m quite sure that you and everyone else who bothers to read my blog knows better than that, so this is just for the casual passer-by:

    There is only ONE Canadian MorphoDyke with whom I have an issue. And she did not earn her pet name via her sexual proclivities or gender.

    She earned it because I’m not above hitting below the belt, and she finds any sexual orientation that isn’t like hers abominable. It’s my little way of insulting her in the way I know will insult her most.

    All that said, I’m at a loss here. Dave, I’ve come to expect much better things from you. You have thus far been a complete gentleman to both me and Kate, and I can’t explain why suddenly it seems like you’re looking to pick a fight with us.

    Please don’t.

  58. JanieBelle says:

    Well, looks like BatboyWonder deleted his account and shut down his Javisonesque one-post-blog.

    The world is a lesser place…

    Not.

  59. Arden Chatfield says:

    I called the authors of the bible “lice ridden beduins” on Uncommon Descent. It really set Josh off. And it’s true. I thought everyone knew that Arabs do their camels

    Dave, as much as I admire your style and the panache with which you abuse Josh ‘You Guys are Crazy’ Bozeman, I have two comments:

    (a) It’s ‘bedouin’. With an ‘o’ in it. Please, normally your spelling is quite good.

    (b) Don’t post at people’s blogs while drunk. God knows what kind of shit you’ll end up saying. Besides, that’s Davison’s specialty.

  60. DaveScot says:

    Arden

    I HIGHLY suggest that when you decide to put on the spelling police uniform you double check your “correction”.

    “Beduin” is a perfectly acceptable spelling.

    See here. Smooth move, ex-lax.

  61. DaveScot says:

    Janie

    I suggest you follow your link to wiki ostensibly supporting “Arab” as a race. You’re wrong.

    From wiki, first sentence of article on Arab:

    The Arabs (Arabic: عرب ʻarab) are an ethnic group mainly found throughout the Middle East and North Africa.

    Now we hit the hyperlink to the definition of ethnic group and we find:

    From an objective standpoint, an ethnic group is also an endogamous population, that is, members of an ethnic group procreate primarily with other members of their ethnic group, something which is measurable in terms of characteristic average genetic frequencies. These differences, however, usually do not approach the magnitude of racial difference in that the genetic differences within an ethnic group are greater than the difference between any two ethnic groups. The characteristic of endogamy is reinforced by proximity, cultural familiarity, and also social pressure (in extreme cases, by legal command) to procreate within the ethnic group.

    Arab is not a race. QED

    However, I will admit to using guilt by association in calling all Arab men misogynous pigs. Perhaps somewhere in the world there’s an Arab man who respects women as equals. It’s a logical fallacy called an argument from igorance to assert that just because no one has ever identified an Arab man who respects women as equals that there is no Arab man who respects women as equals. Heck, maybe there’s even a documented case of an Arab man treating women as equals and I just don’t know about it.

    Camel fuckers was just me taking poetic license. It’s almost physically impossible fercrisakes. However, Arab men do have a propensity for sexual liasons with boys and animals. It might have something to do with treating women like shit. In my experience treating a woman like shit doesn’t exactly increase the chances of scoring. Some men I guess would rather pork a farm animal than be decent to females of their own species.

  62. Arden Chatfield says:

    A quick way of telling how common one spelling is versus another is to simply google both spellings. ‘Beduin’ admittedly returns 341,000 hits, while ‘bedouin’ returns 4,050,000. For example, Wikipedia’s article is under ‘bedouin’. So ‘bedouin’ is almost 12 times as common.

    Is ‘Smooth move, ex-lax’ some kind of Marine thing? I haven’t heard anyone say that since my high school gym teacher in the ’70s.

    My comments about the perils of blogging while drunk stand. Keep pounding Josh B, though – he’s something you and I can both agree on.

  63. blipey says:

    In my experience treating a woman like shit doesn’t exactly increase the chances of scoring. Some men I guess would rather pork a farm animal than be decent to females of their own species.

    In your experience abusing women, Dave? That explains a lot.

    Heck, maybe there’s even a documented case of an Arab man treating women as equals and I just don’t know about it.

    I wouldn’t think so. You know everything, so nope…doesn’t exist. Thanks for playing.

    My “Dave is a jackass” comment would like to be doubled. Shit, you’re an asshole.

  64. Anonymous says:

    Hey Dave, what’s your opinion of Joel Borofsky? Why didn’t Bill go public with him until he’d brought O’Leary on board? Is he some student of Bill’s at East Jerkwater Bible College, or something? His website is certainly cartoonishly entertaining.

  65. Anonymous says:

    I got a third of the way down and could not stop laughing at the two of you. Like an old married couple.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Okay I’m better now. I’ll go back and try to finish.
    vino

  66. JanieBelle says:

    I’d resent that vino, if it weren’t so funny in retrospect.

    You needn’t really bother, the conversation just went in circles.

    I’d tell Josh what was going on, he’d tell me I was wrong, go back to start.

    Well, at least it was entertaining.

    Kisses,
    JanieBelle

  67. keiths says:

    I haven’t seen Tribune7’s comments here (what thread(s) are they on?), but if he’s the same Tribune7 who’s been posting at UD, then he ain’t Josh Bozeman.

    There isn’t anything Tribune7 can say that Josh couldn’t say more stupidly using ten times as many words.

    At UD, I used to beg Josh to think before typing because it got so tiring reading his endless, repetitious, and ultimately useless screeds.

    However, if you were just trying to slam Tribune7 by likening him to Josh, then well done.

  68. JanieBelle says:

    You missed an interesting … discussion, then.

    This is where it was continued from UD, with a link there to the page where it began on UD. Of course that is the thread Dr. Doofus erased, and on which he subsequently gave me the very public boot from UD.

    Here is the new version of that UD thread.

    Note that this is the same thread that caused quite a bit of havoc at UD in the not so distant past. You may recall a bit of a stir in the blogosphere about that time, to which I may have contributed some small part.

  69. JanieBelle says:

    As for Tribune7/Josh thing…

    During the conversation here at our blog, I was also conducting an email conversation with someone else. I mentioned that Tribune7 was logging in from Evansville, and got an email to the effect of “That’s Josh Bozeman!”.

    I’d never heard of him, but got a short rundown of Josh, and a link to his blog.

    During the ensuing conversation, I “accidently” referred to Tribune7 as Josh, and mentioned his sick bunny (from the front page of Josh’s blog).

    At no point did Tribune7 deny being Josh, or ask the obvious question were he not Josh, “What bunny?”.

  70. keiths says:

    JB,

    I can understand your suspicions, given that Josh and Tribune7 are both apparently from Evansville. Having grown up in Indiana, however, I’m sorry to report that Evansville and the rest of the state are full of others like them.

    I also wouldn’t read too much into Tribune7’s non-reply to your bunny remark. He might have been happy to see you following the wrong bunny trail.

    Anyway, what really convinces me is the textual evidence.

    Look at these two typical comments, one taken from Josh’s heyday at UD and the other posted by Tribune7 today:

    Josh:
    no, keiths…i replied to your argument and explained how you were inaccurate in your picture of “slavery” of the bible.

    the founding fathers of the US owned slaves…its time that we follow your logic thru. if the god of the OT is morally bankrupt as davescot says and you seem to agree- then the founders of this nation are also bankrupt. and this was REAL slavery that you speak of, not the OT type that in no way mirrors the US version or european version of slavery.

    if someone recognizes the reality of something and demands humane treatment- as the founders themselves did (heck they did even less than the OT, they dont say to treat outright slaves humanely!), then what now? we can only conclude from your logic and that of others here that the founders were somehow morally bankrupt. if it goes for god of the OT, it goes for them as well since they were even worse in not demanding humane treatment of slaves, and slavery was actually SLAVERY to the founders.

    Comment by Josh Bozeman — December 18, 2005 @ 11:23 am

    Notice the stream-of-consciousness illogic, the idiosyncratic use of punctuation and non-use of capitalization, the bizarre constructions (“they dont say to treat outright slaves humanely!”), and the general inability to shut up. Compare it to Josh’s comments in the current thread and their common, off-kilter origin becomes all too apparent.

    (BTW, that amusing thread, in which Josh and some fellow fundamentalists attempt to defend the Bible’s position on slavery, is at
    http://tinyurl.com/z5ffe )

    Contrast that with a post Tribune7 made today at UD:
    Mats, I think it depends upon the arena in which the debate is occurring. If it’s a courtroom or biology department and you are claiming that your view has equal merit with the prevailing paradigm and does not require Revealed Authority, then you mustn’t appeal to Revealed Authority to make it.

    I think God has shown us a way to do this via complex specified information and irreducible complexity meaning that under the very rules written by the Dawinists we can show that Darwinism is wrong.

    Tribune7 may not be the world’s greatest prose stylist, but compared to Josh he sounds like Saul Bellow.

  71. JanieBelle says:

    Thanks for that Keith. I’ll have to agree that they are most probably not the same person.

    You make a strong case for that.

    I’m sorry to hear that Indiana is overrun with the likes of these. I’ve always kinda thought it was a southern thing + Ohio. Ohio is the state up north that must have migrated in the distant past from down here somewhere. Plate tectonics or something.

    🙂

    Eh, a fundy is a fundy is a fundy. It’s so hard to tell them apart.

    They all look the same to me.

    🙂

    Kisses,
    JanieBelle

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Sex in the Public Square

  • Sex in the Public Square
  • Sex In The Public Square.org

always.

  • always.

A Word About Me

  • I am entirely fictional, and without sexual preference.
  • Don't like it? Don't come back.

EMail

  • janiebellemcknight AT gmail DOT com

The Erotic Dreams of JanieBelle and Lovers

Kate Once Said

  • "Did you know that you don't close your eyes all the way when you sleep?

    It's making me excited again."

Awards and Nominations


WhoreChurch Seal of Approval

Celluloid Blonde Award

  • Best You People Are Truly Geeks Post

Thinking Blogger Award

Excellent Blog Award

Rockin' Girl Blogger Award

Order of the Science Scouts

Mature Content is Contained on this Blog

Help us support Sex Work Awareness

Past Poetry Contest Winners

Kate Once Said:

  • "Did you know that you don't close your eyes all the way when you sleep?

    It's making me excited again."

Awards and Nominations


WhoreChurch Seal of Approval

Celluloid Blonde Award

  • Best You People Are Truly Geeks Post

Thinking Blogger Award

Excellent Blog Award

Rockin' Girl Blogger Award

Order of the Science Scouts

Creative Commons License

All original material on this blog excepting The Lilith Quotient is covered under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial- Share Alike 3.0 License.

Attribution should be made to JanieBelle McKnight, and contain a link to this blog.

The Lilith Quotient

Creative Commons License

The Lilith Quotient by JanieBelle McKnight is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial- No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

Attribution should be made to JanieBelle McKnight, and contain a link to this blog.

z

Site Meter

Peeking Dreamers

  • 397,957 Page Views Since Moving To WordPress
%d bloggers like this: