Show Your Pants - argument version

Yes, the pants thread must be protected, unsullied by the Robert pwnage

i posted under a womans username name here once - within the first ten posts i got two pms from members - wanting to "know more about me".
I can't begin to imagine what girls on forums get in their pm's
I abandoned the account for fear of finding stuff i dont want to know about members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert00000

The fact is unlike manker i can get attractive women in real life i dont need to befriend them on the net.

---

:lol: I suppose it would be hard to use Rohypnol over the net.

Even if you can't trust the personal details, try to remember this is a family board, which is often visited by a lot of young. Especially at this time of year
when the schools are off. And to be honest, all your posts I've had the misfortune to stumble on seem to be flirting with some member of the board or plain egocentric bs about your buisness.


Nice to hear you notice my posts.
I still couldn't care less about yours.

Anyone remember Chalkmongoose? He was banned for something very similar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank

Anyone remember Chalkmongoose? He was banned for something very similar.

---

No he wasn't.

It had to do with pedophilia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert00000

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by missie

Give over, it does state her age in every post she makes.
You must have noticed that.

---

Funnily enough i don't. If what people wrote there was true then I'm 2 years old, and you come from hobbitshire. I dont usually take much notice of who posts unless its you or some of the people i like e.g. ike, jonno, gemby, ziggy, withcheese etc.

What i dispise is manker making slanderous accusations. I have never pm'd SGG and would like the admins to check that and find out who did, because it didnt come from my account.

Manker is a sad sole who perhaps has no life of interest outside this forum. His only joy comes from whatever affection he gets from females here by supposedly trying to defend them. Whatever way he gets his joy is not my concern, what I take issue with is when he lables me to be something i'm not, maybe its something he is, i dont know.

Everything i post of any interest has been on the main threads for everyone to see, the comic effect would be lost if in a PM. Only manker or someone equally sad would get pleasure out of posting anything lewd on a PM.

The fact is unlike manker i can get attractive women in real life i dont need to befriend them on the net. I've posted some pics of my girlfriends here before and they are far prettier than any i've seen on this forum.

Unless manker has become retarded he will know not to make accusations that have no proof. I again stress the admins need to find out who sgg got the pm's from and if it was manker himself.

@ brenda and others. Sorry this thread has been hijacked by this retards who cant stop making false accusations even though the person concerned admitted she wasnt sure who the PM's came from. If the admins were to check the records we can all get back to the topic.

---

Ladies of the forum you don't stand a chance of "getting it on" with Robbie.
So,please stop the pm's!

By the way...Getting drunk and placing a puppet of Paris Hilton on your hand, does not constitute having a girlfriend.

That is all...twat.

bd

going away flowers for you, Robert :flowers:

[QUOTE=manker]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert00000

I've already demonstrated why I'm pretty sure that you're a pervy letch who finds children attractive.

You want me to do it again, do you.

---

I will make a formal complaint to the mods about the accusations manker is making. The facts do not reflect his accusations. He continues to make very serious accusations without any grounds, and if the mods are fair they will take appropriate action against him.

Where is the evidence for what he is claiming? In this thread i simply overlooked the info on the left, which i never take much notice of in any case because it very rarely consists of true information. And the obscure thread manker dug up from the past, you will see i made a singular post on that thread and didnt bother to read the replies, and in the context of what the other posters were saying wasnt out place as we didnt know her age. In any case look at her own posts there, she was claiming her boobs are bigger, if she was only 14 then why was she in an adult discussion.


The FACT is manker is the one who befriends under-age girls.

I'm 15 :) . BTW who cares. What if it was a mistake? He forgot (manker) you told him (Robert0001) about her age. And it doesnt fuckin matter if you were 1 year older. :dry:

[QUOTE=Robert00000]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

I will make a formal complaint to the mods ....

---

You really are a sad person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert the pervy letch

I will make a formal complaint to the mods about the accusations manker is making. The facts do not reflect his accusations. He continues to make very serious accusations without any grounds, and if the mods are fair they will take appropriate action against him.

Where is the evidence for what he is claiming? In this thread i simply overlooked the info on the left, which i never take much notice of in any case because it very rarely consists of true information. And the obscure thread manker dug up from the past, you will see i made a singular post on that thread and didnt bother to read the replies, and in the context of what the other posters were saying wasnt out place as we didnt know her age. In any case look at her own posts there, she was claiming her boobs are bigger, if she was only 14 then why was she in an adult discussion.


The FACT is manker is the one who befriends under-age girls.

---

You're a bit late, Robert.

I've been chatting about this to the mods for a day or so. We're trying to find what happened to that smutty PM you sent before it was deleted.

Ok, so you want to talk about facts:

Fact is that SGG told me you'd PMed her and I have a PM to back that up - which I've posted.

Fact is that SGG posted that you'd sent her smutty PMs.

Fact is that your defence is flimsy. If you were a sex pest IRL and your excuse was that 'you didn't know how old she was' -- it wouldn't wash, as an adult you have a duty to not letch all over children. You'd STILL be a sex pest and charged/treated accordingly.

Fact is that you have a duty of care to use the information at hand to ensure that you're not making inappropriate comments to minors.

Fact is that here, on FST, her age has been posted on the forum more than 1441 times (with each post and when her Dad and I specifically told you). You say that you've missed all of them. A tad hard to believe, particularly when you take the next point into consideration.

Fact is that you say you don't know SGG nor how old she is yet you made a thread specifically for her.

Fact is that you make lots of threads specifically for young girls or aimed sexually at women. Sara Gemby Gemby Gemby Lilmiss Boobs Lilmiss Lilmiss Lilmiss

Fact is that PM or no PM - you still make my skin crawl.



Those are the facts, Robert - you pervy, creepy, sinister letch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Fact is that you make lots of threads specifically for young girls or aimed sexually at women. Gemby Gemby Gemby

---

Not to steal your thunder, D. but "Gemby spamming" "Gemby missing" and a japanese transvestite hardly seem like sexual overtures to underage girls. :unsure:

GO Jerry Go Jerry :01:

Quote:

---

Those are the facts, Robert - you pervy, creepy, sinister letch.

---

:lol: That made me laugh, sinister letch :lol:

Jonno :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guillaume

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Fact is that you make lots of threads specifically for young girls or aimed sexually at women. Gemby Gemby Gemby

---

Not to steal your thunder, D. but "Gemby spamming" "Gemby missing" and a japanese transvestite hardly seem like sexual overtures to underage girls. :unsure:

---

Meh, just making a point. Robert the sinister, pervy letch was insinuating that I try to befriend young girls, which I probably do when I'm not being a sarky arse, I certainly don't discriminate against them - however, his overtures dwarf my own.

Mind, on close inspection it could be said that I've an unhealthy interest in male genetalia. Here and here :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert00000

This means someone else created an account with a similar name to mine and was posing as me, and who sent PM's to people.

---

I just checked and there is no account that looks like your username.
There are other 'robert' accounts but none of them have 000001 or something like that behind it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by {I}{K}{E}

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert00000

This means someone else created an account with a similar name to mine and was posing as me, and who sent PM's to people.

---

I just checked and there is no account that looks like your username.
There are other 'robert' accounts but none of them have 000001 or something like that behind it.

---

Well, that leaves him with the "someone haxored my account!!!1!1 BBQ" argument.

BTW, accounts with the name Robert followed by numbers exist, but all with less than 5 posts. That means no PMing ability, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guillaume

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by {I}{K}{E}

I just checked and there is no account that looks like your username.
There are other 'robert' accounts but none of them have 000001 or something like that behind it.

---

Well, that leaves him with the "someone haxored my account!!!1!1 BBQ" argument.

BTW, accounts with the name Robert followed by numbers exist, but all with less than 5 posts. That means no PMing ability, right?

---

no. members with 0 posts can send PM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by {I}{K}{E}

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guillaume

Well, that leaves him with the "someone haxored my account!!!1!1 BBQ" argument.

BTW, accounts with the name Robert followed by numbers exist, but all with less than 5 posts. That means no PMing ability, right?

---

no. members with 0 posts can send PM.

---

When did it change? :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guillaume

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by {I}{K}{E}

no. members with 0 posts can send PM.

---

When did it change? :unsure:

---

when we started using vBulletin.

we tried to disable it for -10 post users but its not possible with vB. (havent seen a hack that can do this)

Hmmm, but at the time of the alleged PM'ing, were we on vbulletin or IPB ... :unsure:

Pretty soon this whole thing will blow over :wacko:

the VB thing? hopefully it will, i really want to post the fuck VB northern monkey thing, but i've misplaced it

until then, let's have a cup of tea and wait for this whole thing to blow over

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarthInsinuate

the VB thing? hopefully it will, i really want to post the fuck VB northern monkey thing, but i've misplaced it

until then, let's have a cup of tea and wait for this whole thing to blow over

---

exactly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guillaume

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Fact is that you make lots of threads specifically for young girls or aimed sexually at women. Gemby Gemby Gemby

---

Not to steal your thunder, D. but "Gemby spamming" "Gemby missing" and a japanese transvestite hardly seem like sexual overtures to underage girls. :unsure:

---

At last we have someone who is actually looking at the evidence and making a judgement from that. But manker continues to make slanderous accusations.

To be honest i dont think there were any smutty PM's to SGG, I know for sure non originated from my account. She perhaps tried to make her conversation with manker interesting and said i PM'd her.

The fact is no evidence can be found of me PMing her or her PMing me. Just because manker has messages from her saying i PMed her doesnt mean they ever existed. This does not amount to proof.

And as for mankers other accusations, he is walking on dangerous ground. If the mods are fair and look at all his posts he will get a ban.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert00000

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guillaume

Not to steal your thunder, D. but "Gemby spamming" "Gemby missing" and a japanese transvestite hardly seem like sexual overtures to underage girls. :unsure:

---

And as for mankers other accusations, he is walking on dangerous ground. If the mods are fair and look at all his posts he will get a ban.

---

:lol:

I love it when people try cheap manipilation tricks.

Don't you think that is really obvious, anyone who doesn't see that is as stupid as you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Chester

To be honest i dont think there were any smutty PM's to SGG, I know for sure non originated from my account. She perhaps tried to make her conversation with manker interesting and said i PM'd her.

---

Ah, so now she's lying. I did wonder when that one would come out.


Personally I reckon you should just go away again ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert00000

At last we have someone who is actually looking at the evidence and making a judgement from that. But manker continues to make slanderous accusations.

---

Sorry, pal but you're wrong. I just want to make sure they have an iron-clad case before they ban your ass.
Some of the posts and threads manker linked to just don't prove his point, and that is what I was pointing to him.


As I said before, adieu.

I agree with Robert that manker made some comments towards him that he should not have posted.

manker has no real proof that Robert00000 send those PM to SGG. SGG said herself that she is not 100% sure that those PMs were send by Robert00000.

If you post a picture like SSG posted you must expect that it's possible members will post sexual tinted replies.

manker was told by a minor that she had received smutty messages from an adult. An adult who had every reason to know that she was a minor. All this bollox about "14 in her details could be untrue" is specious and distracting. The fact is that anyone who behaves the way he does, on the interweb or anywhere else, should err on the side of caution and do nothing unless he knows the person is an adult. Flirt badly, fine no prob if it's two adults, but if there's any doubt then don't

manker reacted to this in the same way I would have done. He started by pointing out to Robert that she was a minor, as did her father. The situation escalated from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert the pervy letch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guillaume

Not to steal your thunder, D. but "Gemby spamming" "Gemby missing" and a japanese transvestite hardly seem like sexual overtures to underage girls. :unsure:

---

At last we have someone who is actually looking at the evidence and making a judgement from that. But manker continues to make slanderous accusations.

To be honest i dont think there were any smutty PM's to SGG, I know for sure non originated from my account. She perhaps tried to make her conversation with manker interesting and said i PM'd her.

The fact is no evidence can be found of me PMing her or her PMing me. Just because manker has messages from her saying i PMed her doesnt mean they ever existed. This does not amount to proof.

And as for mankers other accusations, he is walking on dangerous ground. If the mods are fair and look at all his posts he will get a ban.

---

Hehe.

So, you're going to totally ignore what I pointed out - that you lied about knowing who SGG is. You made a thread with her name in the title just a few months ago. You went to the trouble of posting a picture for her.

Are we to believe that Robert, entrepreneur extraordinaire, has the memory span and intellectual capacity of some sort of sophistic swamp rat. Deary me, you've already regaled us with tales of how you somehow missed one and a half THOUSAND references to her age.

Are you an imbicile, at all.

Seems to me if you can lie about this, when pwnage is so fucking easy - I just clicked your member name; then it's highly likely that it is YOU who is the liar about the smutty PMs and not SGG.


As for me getting banned. Dream on, swampy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by {I}{K}{E}

I agree with Robert that manker made some comments towards him that he should not have posted.

manker has no real proof that Robert00000 send those PM to SGG. SSG said herself that she is not 100% sure that those PMs were send by Robert00000.

If you post a picture like SSG posted you must expect that it's possible members will post sexual tinted replies.

---

Robert is a pervy letch who has a penchant for young girls. He said so, I read that post this morning - I decided the pervy letch part all by myself, a kind of extrapolation.

I take it that you disagree?

As adults we must protect the young, it is not up to them to shield themselves from pervs like Robert. Adults need to set down guidlines for what is and what isn't acceptable.

If you believed it wrong for her to post a pic, you should have said at the time. Given that she was fully clothed, I see no problem.

It would only arouse and subsequently elicit sexual remarks from a pervy letch who has a penchant for young girls.

Do you see where I get the pervy letch part from now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Sometimes I argue just for the sake of it, this is not one of those occasions.

Spare a thought for me tho' - It's tough being right all of the time.

---

Dont remember if it was you or cheese but dint we argue for 100 post about me glorifyin a serial killer,but by posting a picture.I think cheese started it and you joined in later.

---

Don't think so. Arguing on the internet doesn't sound like something I'd do.

@Robert - yes i have noticed your over enthusiasm for female members on the board - to the extent where i have wondered is it mutual?
- if it is, great but i did not see equally zealous replys to your gestures -
hence i think erm um ok wtf... :blink: .
In the begining you came in here speaking much about money & business which i regarded as somewhat inspirational compared to other banter on the board - but yes as of late you come in here very occasionally and your posts have been sort of oneliner onetrack minded... no problem it is a free webworld but it is noticable.
I think what manker is trying to say on a subtle tone..If female members Dislike your Gestures (whether they are ment as sarcasm/playfull whatever) and have stated so (eg.Lilmiss) then maybe it is wise to reconsider such behaviour.

----------
If the mods had recieved complaints from female members about xxxxx's behaviour etc then they would probably immiediatly deal with the problem.
This has not happened since none of the mods have confirmed & there seems to be no harsh malcontent from the side of SpatulaGG towards Robert0 directly in this thread.

In a business if a female dislikes a colueges flatulant gestures - this could be regarded as sexual harasment.

This is not a business - this world in here only exists of typed Words - limitless yet touchy.
it is upto you how far you go...

Robert000 - Defendant
Manker - Prosecuter
IKE - Judge
Everybody else- jury

Maybe Affronaut (Ithink hes the one who posted his vids) or RPerry (I cant remember) could make a movie out of this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPaul

manker was told by a minor that she had received smutty messages from an adult. An adult who had every reason to know that she was a minor. All this bollox about "14 in her details could be untrue" is specious and distracting. The fact is that anyone who behaves the way he does, on the interweb or anywhere else, should err on the side of caution and do nothing unless he knows the person is an adult. Flirt badly, fine no prob if it's two adults, but if there's any doubt then don't

manker reacted to this in the same way I would have done. He started by pointing out to Robert that she was a minor, as did her father. The situation escalated from there.

---

Lets get this straight once and for all, what are you exactly arguing about? The posts i made on this thread and the Gillian anderson boobs thread or the smutty PM 's manker is accussing me of sending?

There is no evidence smutty PM's were sent from my account to SGG, all we have is "hearsay". Even when SGG told manker she wasnt even sure where the PM's came from manker was still convinced they came from my account, assuming there were smutty PM's in the first place. It seems strange for no evidence to be found on her account or mine. One thing i want to know is did she send any replies to the alleged PM's? if so they would have been sent to my account if they originated from me.

As for the posts in this thread and the gillian anderson thread, look at the context. If SGG was a minor then she should not have been taking part in these discussions because as IKE point out, they would attract sexually tinted replies.

In the gillian anderson thread all i replied to her comment of "her boobs being bigger" than gillian's was "we demand proof". It was after my post that manker pointed out she was 14. I didnt check back to see the reply as the fact no further posts made from me on this thread thereafter indicates. I'm not like manker, i dont live my life through this forum, i have a busy life in the real world and have real friends and girlfriends so dont have the same urge to read every post in every thread and to know everything about everyone here as manker does.

In this thread you can see all the posts for yourself and make your judgement.

If she was a minor then why did she make the posts she made especially considering her father is supposed to be here to lookin gat her activity, and in any case my reply cannot be considered by any reasonable person to be anything other than harmless.

Anyone having problems with what i posted on this thread should go out into the real world and find out what girls SGG age talk about, i have friends near her age so i know. If SGG found my comments offensive she would have complained, and would not have posted a pic of herself in her underwear if she was the type to be offended by such a harmless comment.

The thread i created for SGG was a long time ago, when i frequented this place more often. But at the time i made very many posts and created so many threads and was looking for anything interesting to post about.

I'm sure i was under the impression SGG was a gay guy or a lesbian (above the legal age might i add) who had a weird facination with japanese transsexuals, because her avatar had a pic of some japanese transsexual. This does not however mean i particularly cared to know her any better. She was just another of the many thousands of members who frequented this place.

Again i want to stress, look at what i actually posted (and not the PM's that have no evidence), keep them in context and make your judgement. Then look at mankers accusations i.e

Quote:

---

Robert is a pervy letch who has a penchant for young girls

---

and see how they stack up with the facts. Manker has many friends here as he spends most of his life here, so you will find a great number of partizan comments.

However, those people who are actually interested in the truth should make their judgement from the facts as displayed and decide who should get a ban, me for the harmless comments or manker for the baseless but very serious accusations.

@ 100%, in real life i have many female friends and the type of humor i have shown here they appreciate. I have never had any women complain, they sometimes call me cheeky but this is in good heart.

I admit some of what i've posted did not travel well in the typed form as it would have done if it were spoken to a real person but the intention was always there.

I think manker in real life has difficulty talking to women, perhaps if he were to use my type of humor with women in real life he would receive a negative riposte. There is obviously an element of jealousy there, whether its concerning women or money, because i have both (single at the mo and waiting for a call from missy :lol: ).

The problem isnt with the PM's or my posts, it is with manker. He is a pathetic person who really needs to get a life. Anyone who has been on this forum long enough will have seen our previous battles. His obession with the so called "pawnage" is no substitute for ambition and success. Is "pawning" someone winning an argument against them or is it the delusion of a win? If it is the latter then he has "pawned" me every time :blink: .


I would like the mods to offer their comment on the matters raised here, only they can be considered impartial. IKE has kindly looked at the evidence and decided in my favour, as any other impartial person would have done.

The comment manker made

Quote:

---

Robert is a pervy letch who has a penchant for young girls

---

has no basis. It is a very serious accusation and the mods should take neccessary action against him.

Does n't look good Robert, even if your innocent others will think your guilty just by your handle " Anonymous Lurker " . I think most of your threads were probably just flirty but on the net you never know ones age so you have to be respectful . SGG girl seems like a nice young lady have you tryed to pm her to apologize that it was "not" you sending the pm's ?

That would be my first step I think, mind you I'm not the one being accussed of harrasment If I was I probably could n't think clearly either. Manker should be commended if he's right and if wrong a simple sorry is in order.

Sorry for the long post but I have young ones on the net and constantly worry. I feel kinda sorry for SGG as she did n't ask for this, I know the young try to act older its all a part of growing up . We should be protecting them at all cost .


To be brutaly honest I thought Sgg was a guy at first too but one never knows .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert00000

Lets get this straight once and for all, what are you exactly arguing about? The posts i made on this thread and the Gillian anderson boobs thread or the smutty PM 's manker is accussing me of sending?

There is no evidence smutty PM's were sent from my account to SGG, all we have is "hearsay". Even when SGG told manker she wasnt even sure where the PM's came from manker was still convinced they came from my account, assuming there were smutty PM's in the first place. It seems strange for no evidence to be found on her account or mine. One thing i want to know is did she send any replies to the alleged PM's? if so they would have been sent to my account if they originated from me.

As for the posts in this thread and the gillian anderson thread, look at the context. If SGG was a minor then she should not have been taking part in these discussions because as IKE point out, they would attract sexually tinted replies.

In the gillian anderson thread all i replied to her comment of "her boobs being bigger" than gillian's was "we demand proof". It was after my post that manker pointed out she was 14. I didnt check back to see the reply as the fact no further posts made from me on this thread thereafter indicates. I'm not like manker, i dont live my life through this forum, i have a busy life in the real world and have real friends and girlfriends so dont have the same urge to read every post in every thread and to know everything about everyone here as manker does.

In this thread you can see all the posts for yourself and make your judgement.

If she was a minor then why did she make the posts she made especially considering her father is supposed to be here to lookin gat her activity, and in any case my reply cannot be considered by any reasonable person to be anything other than harmless.

Anyone having problems with what i posted on this thread should go out into the real world and find out what girls SGG age talk about, i have friends near her age so i know. If SGG found my comments offensive she would have complained, and would not have posted a pic of herself in her underwear if she was the type to be offended by such a harmless comment.

The thread i created for SGG was a long time ago, when i frequented this place more often. But at the time i made very many posts and created so many threads and was looking for anything interesting to post about.

I'm sure i was under the impression SGG was a gay guy or a lesbian (above the legal age might i add) who had a weird facination with japanese transsexuals, because her avatar had a pic of some japanese transsexual. This does not however mean i particularly cared to know her any better. She was just another of the many thousands of members who frequented this place.

Again i want to stress, look at what i actually posted (and not the PM's that have no evidence), keep them in context and make your judgement. Then look at mankers accusations i.e

Quote:

---

Robert is a pervy letch who has a penchant for young girls

---

and see how they stack up with the facts. Manker has many friends here as he spends most of his life here, so you will find a great number of partizan comments.

However, those people who are actually interested in the truth should make their judgement from the facts as displayed and decide who should get a ban, me for the harmless comments or manker for the baseless but very serious accusations.

@ 100%, in real life i have many female friends and the type of humor i have shown here they appreciate. I have never had any women complain, they sometimes call me cheeky but this is in good heart.

I admit some of what i've posted did not travel well in the typed form as it would have done if it were spoken to a real person but the intention was always there.

I think manker in real life has difficulty talking to women, perhaps if he were to use my type of humor with women in real life he would receive a negative riposte. There is obviously an element of jealousy there, whether its concerning women or money, because i have both (single at the mo and waiting for a call from missy :lol: ).

The problem isnt with the PM's or my posts, it is with manker. He is a pathetic person who really needs to get a life. Anyone who has been on this forum long enough will have seen our previous battles. His obession with the so called "pawnage" is no substitute for ambition and success. Is "pawning" someone winning an argument against them or is it the delusion of a win? If it is the latter then he has "pawned" me every time :blink: .


I would like the mods to offer their comment on the matters raised here, only they can be considered impartial. IKE has kindly looked at the evidence and decided in my favour, as any other impartial person would have done.

The comment manker made

Quote:

---

Robert is a pervy letch who has a penchant for young girls

---

has no basis. It is a very serious accusation and the mods should take neccessary action against him.

---

Shut it, letch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peat moss

To be brutaly honest I thought Sgg was a guy at first too but one never knows .

---

It was the girl bit in her username that gave it away for me.

Im with manker on this one. Robert does seem do go a bit OTT with the women round here :unsure: I even have a picture of lilmiss having a go at robert some time last year over robert making some vibrator comment to her :lol: I'll post it if missie lets me :P Its pretty much just a big telling of though.