Having read that abortion of a thread, I see that Gregus has a questionable attitude and low level of steroid education.
However, so do many who read this forum, I’m sure. I too started out with a low level steroid education - as did we all.
However I do not like the attitude displayed by him, especially towards one who genuinely lifted this board with his educated and thoughtful posts.
I am disheartened that he left, but also surprised that he allowed Gregus to infuriate him so much. You have to use a certain level of detatchment when on an internet forum. It’s the only means of staying sane. To leave is at best a hollow victory. Better to stay and ignore, than leave and let the forum degenerate IMO.
Whoa i feel like im getting raged on for something i didn’t do.
His statement open up with:
“To imply that, winstrol is possibly “safer” than the other AAS, is very incorrect.”
His statements are absolutely incorrect and he does not know what he’s talking about. Sorry.
That was about what i said to him and about him. Then i got flipped out on. He made a broad generalization and i disagreed. I;m not sure where anything else came from. I consider my knowledge on AS to be moderate and certainly NOT as good as some here that are of a PHD level in education on this.
I know what he was saying but his angle of discussion was IMO incorrect. Furthermore i was called name after name even though i didn’t reciprocate.
Is it any real argument really that running a cycle of 200 mg or primo weekly and 20 mg of var daily for six weeks is “SAFER” then a cycle of 50mg daily of anadrol and Test suspension @ 100mg daily for six weeks?
He seemed to infer that there is really NO difference in the safety of those two cycles. as in NO DIFFERENCE. So i disagreed. Why didn’t anyone else? If i’m missing something here just let me know, and i do apologize for unintentionally setting someone off. [/quote]
Let me give you a tip regarding etiquette on an internet forum. Of course this is just how I view it and handle things, not taken from some mythical ‘internet guidance bible’ or anything, you understand.
Ok. When someone “seems to infer” as you yourself put it, you have to tread carefully. This is especially true when that poster possesses more knowledge on a given suject than you do.
You certainly do not write a reply that states “His statements are absolutely incorrect and he does not know what he’s talking about.”
It is more likely that your iterpretation of his inferences was wrong.
And since you later admit that “I know what he was saying but his angle of discussion was IMO incorrect.” then this compounds the issue, since you cannot correct an ‘angle of discussion’ with “His statements are absolutely incorrect and he does not know what he’s talking about.”
In short you come across as boorish and truculent. The very ‘asshole-ish’ characteristics you profess to eschew in this forum.
So you went and perpetuated the very type of behaviour you railed against in a recent thread. Hypocritical at best IMO.
Now I don’t agree with how EgJ handled your comment. Normally he would have shown more grace and aplomb. So I have to surmise that yours was the straw that broke the camels’ back, or that he is having a tough time of things in his ‘real’ life and you caught the flack.
Take me for example, i’m an annoying little shit with my social faux pases (sic) and lack of boundaries but i always pepper my brusqueness with a modicom of humility.
Like that adderrall thread, in which i qualified my disagreements with “correct me if i’m wrong,” and “i’m sure you’re knowledge of pharmacology is way superior to mine, and so i will defer to your better judgement, BUT…” etc. Such statements are enough to massage their egos, particularly when uneducated little shits, such as myself, go around presenting contrary opinions which may nevertheless be correct i am stupid.