🐮 Lolcow Timothy "TJ" Church / Cowlick - Failed Literotica Writer &/or Null's Best Friend

[namazuros]

1] There will be an apology for lying the second I intentionally lie & notice I myself have done so..

Funny you say that...

Called that ASSumption by all of you (accent on the first three letters due to the -holes you all are, as well as the holes you have proven must be in your heads) for the shit that it is/was.

Also, while I am not TJ/Tim, I am connected to him through a few online areas, & he has told me he is already in contact with Tumblr about shutting-down the Tumblr area you have named after & based on him (without requesting permission or allowing him any input). However, this contact will cease if I let him know you are removing it, thereby requiring him to take no further steps.

 

[Saney]

However, largely because many of you started attacking me before I ever joined (let alone posted) here

Two people were talking about you. Two. Two does not qualify as "many". Can you not count? It wasn't even attacking, they were just discussing you.

1B] Also, let's make these things work both ways: If people want proof my intelligence is greater than theirs, I'd like to see any of you prove it is not

This thread isn't about us, Teej, it's about you. We're not the ones trying to prove our intelligence here, that's you.

 

[exball]

I can't do that if you block mr from the site. Also, here is the rest of that post you supposedly (not actually) quoted...


1] There will be an apology for lying the second I intentionally lie & notice I myself have done so. However, largely because many of you started attacking me before I ever joined (let alone posted) here, & also largely because you seem to be claiming that use of ampersands & other things that prove nothing about intelligence levels are such proof (&/or other way to attack me that are in fact untrue), I have been relatively careful to lessen (if not entirely avoid) that.

1B] Also, let's make these things work both ways: If people want proof my intelligence is greater than theirs, I'd like to see any of you prove it is not. Also, since it appears you are now asking for me to apologize for lying, I would like an apology for the same thing from each of you, one for each lie you have told (starting with the claim some of you have made of having intelligence not simply equal to mine, but superior to mine).

2] I felt "the need to act in a false name" because I figured that such dishonest action would cause me to be accepted faster & easier by the vast majority of members here. Why? Members here who had little-if-any idea who I was were unfairly forming very strong negative opinions about me. Therefore, I felt it only right to defend myself (as anyone would against any attack), but to do so pretending to be someone who knew "TJChurch" rather than being "TJChurch" himself, the person I actually am. Frankly, both are false statements, but if anything, mine was a lesser offense, as I was making statements about someone I actually know (& knew at the time).

I'm not joking when I say this is the most autistic post I've read in several years. This shit is breathtaking.

 

[Hawker Hurricane]

I found some Holy Artifacts

Highlights:
"Randy also said this was the best competitors. You were both WRONG. Jessica is amazing, but she stands out many weeks. As for Joshua? He is the worst male left. With luck, that will change tonight, as HE will leave."
"No need to show something else to his talent, as he hs yet to prove he has any outside of church (where he no doubt prays he won't suck each week)."

TJChurch • 3 years ago

• Is it Roger's fault that he said it, or that it was true?!

 

[DespicableFool]

I can't do that if you block mr from the site. Also, here is the rest of that post you supposedly (not actually) quoted...


1] There will be an apology for lying the second I intentionally lie & notice I myself have done so. However, largely because many of you started attacking me before I ever joined (let alone posted) here, & also largely because you seem to be claiming that use of ampersands & other things that prove nothing about intelligence levels are such proof (&/or other way to attack me that are in fact untrue), I have been relatively careful to lessen (if not entirely avoid) that.

1B] Also, let's make these things work both ways: If people want proof my intelligence is greater than theirs, I'd like to see any of you prove it is not. Also, since it appears you are now asking for me to apologize for lying, I would like an apology for the same thing from each of you, one for each lie you have told (starting with the claim some of you have made of having intelligence not simply equal to mine, but superior to mine).

2] I felt "the need to act in a false name" because I figured that such dishonest action would cause me to be accepted faster & easier by the vast majority of members here. Why? Members here who had little-if-any idea who I was were unfairly forming very strong negative opinions about me. Therefore, I felt it only right to defend myself (as anyone would against any attack), but to do so pretending to be someone who knew "TJChurch" rather than being "TJChurch" himself, the person I actually am. Frankly, both are false statements, but if anything, mine was a lesser offense, as I was making statements about someone I actually know (& knew at the time).

I don't think anyone was blocking you from the site. I think it may interest you that the site is a DDoS target right now, actually. That might be why you had trouble.

Key word is 'most,' sir; I joined this site after you did. Whatever I said was based on your words and what you did based on what I saw upon entering. You destroyed whatever chances of winning me over by your pitiful attempts to belittle others by not engaging in any intelligent conversation. You have to admit, though: The fact that you repeat yourself isn't working, and it is idiotic to attempt to make it work any more. Try mixing it up in some way. The ampersands aren't a sign of intellect, but they are a mark of laziness. And it doesn't help your case that you use excessive slashes between words. It is just bad form and suggests improper schooling, among other possibilities of course. The main issue with these, basically, is us wondering why it would kill you to type 'and' instead of 'this&that'. I hope this makes sense. I could keep going about how your writing style puts us off, but I am kinda tired right now, so I will keep this short. You are hard to read. And if you don't fix it, it suggests you don't know how. And considering this is something taught in grade school, early- to mid-level in fact, you not knowing how to do this correctly is an indirect clue of your intelligence that some will feel free to interpret in a way that is unflattering to you. It doesn;t matter if you have a massive brain around here if you can't properly communicate it, which is your single biggest problem so far.

The moment you intentionally lie. Huh. Despite the fact that someone already provided evidence, recent evidence, that you lied, I can put up with your shenanigans. But keep in mind this means I'll be watching what you say, just like everyone else, just like I should have been doing, but couldn't because I am a college student who needs to come around mostly at night- I'm getting off topic here. Sorry; can't apologize for something I didn't say. Did I touch a nerve by saying you live in your Mother's basement? Was I wrong? Then that wasn't a lie; I can't be called a liar if I am wrong about an assumption. And no, I wasn't spreading rumors or lies based off that either, before you say anything.

Oh; OH! You do, huh?! Take me up on my earlier challenge then! Put me through a mental exercise, any at all, and go through it for yourself too. That's a good way to do it, I think. I called you at your words. Again. Will you follow through? Because seriously, you should be smarter than a kid. Ignoring me will prove cowardice, if not stupidity based on your excuse for doing so. So come on, TJ; are you man enough?

Defend yourself? Really? Okay, uh, how is our discussion of you here, with said discussion completely confined to the site, attacking your entire online legacy, or however you want to put it, after most of the damage to your erotica profile was done before this thread began? To make this last sentence more palatable, how is this thread actually threatening your good name, if the buck starts AND stops here? Am I missing something here? And really, complaining that we're judging you without getting to know you is a moot point. Welcome to the Internet. (By the way, you end on a rather jumbled note- I can't understand a word you said from about the third- or fourth-to-last line onward. And before you say it, no it's actually you, since, again, you seem to not understand how to write properly.

If you get one thing from this, I want that to be this: You want us to prove our intelligence, and you want us to understand your intelligence. I for one am one of those hands-on learners, a scientist at heart. Thus, I require this to be very clear, and for these claims to be proven in a definite manner. I have been inviting you to prove yourself against me, someone you should be smarter than anyway, and yet you ignore me. Either take me up on my challenge, and make guidelines to do this because I am confident enough to play by your rules, or give me a good reason why you ignore me and your big break.

 

[Firesharpie]

I can't do that if you block mr from the site. Also, here is the rest of that post you supposedly (not actually) quoted...


1] There will be an apology for lying the second I intentionally lie & notice I myself have done so. However, largely because many of you started attacking me before I ever joined (let alone posted) here, & also largely because you seem to be claiming that use of ampersands & other things that prove nothing about intelligence levels are such proof (&/or other way to attack me that are in fact untrue), I have been relatively careful to lessen (if not entirely avoid) that.

1B] Also, let's make these things work both ways: If people want proof my intelligence is greater than theirs, I'd like to see any of you prove it is not. Also, since it appears you are now asking for me to apologize for lying, I would like an apology for the same thing from each of you, one for each lie you have told (starting with the claim some of you have made of having intelligence not simply equal to mine, but superior to mine).

2] I felt "the need to act in a false name" because I figured that such dishonest action would cause me to be accepted faster & easier by the vast majority of members here. Why? Members here who had little-if-any idea who I was were unfairly forming very strong negative opinions about me. Therefore, I felt it only right to defend myself (as anyone would against any attack), but to do so pretending to be someone who knew "TJChurch" rather than being "TJChurch" himself, the person I actually am. Frankly, both are false statements, but if anything, mine was a lesser offense, as I was making statements about someone I actually know (& knew at the time).

 

[Andrew Noel Schaefer]

Do not worry, Cowlick! You ARE the smartest man in the universe! For it is your incredible smarts that created this lovely world! We are the spawn of your creations!

In the begining there was nothing. And then TJ smiled upon creation, and lo and behold!

TJ, I ask of you one thing: Please find whoever is doing the DDOS and stop them! You are our only hope!

[00:52] <Woody_Chan> where is TJchurch when we need him the most?
[00:52] <Woody_Chan> Do you know Hulk Hogan? He is but one of TJs Titans
[00:52] <Woody_Chan> Titans of TJ they called them in the early days
[00:53] <Woody_Chan> We live in a magical time now when TJ graces us with his presence! He does not know hate! He only knows love!
[00:53] <Woody_Chan> Underage loli love but I digress
[00:56] <Sum1> i want to anally pleasure tj
[00:56] <Sum1> then i want to rub my shitty dick on his teeth
[01:13] <Woody_Chan> woah

 

[Toasty]

I notice that our buddy TJ here seems to think that two people giving him less than a page of discussion constitutes "making much of the area about him", and seems to believe that this is a huge deal that will impact his nonexistent social life and equally nonexistent literary career. So big of a deal that he feels the need to come here nightly to beat the dead horse. It makes me wonder what he would do if he were to become an established writer. Surely he realizes that there are thousands of boards and groups relentlessly tearing apart people like Neil Gaiman, and the older greats like Proust. Virginia Woolf had her life torn to tiny peices in every available form of media. When he finishes and publishes his work (lol) will he be a nightly visitor to every forum discussing his style and literary merits or lack thereof? Will he pretend to be someone else to try and sneak under the radar and say nice things about himself? Will he demand over and over again that all unapproved discussion of him be silenced and disappear NOW NOW NOW? Would he smarmily insist on his superiority while behaving like a child? Maybe he should consider us practice for that future day when his musical hits broadway. Right.

 

[deductionotaku]

Howdy, folks! While my username here is deductionotaku, I'm certain the focal point of this thread would know me better as Kaitou1412, the man who religiously deletes his off-topic posts from our original forum at LitErotica. I happen to stumble across this thread thanks to a link in a user's signature, and my goodness! I have thoroughly enjoyed catching up on my old problem.

Now then, several questions were posed across this thread, and I can answer a few of them. Additionally, certain comments stuck out when I read them, so allow me to address those as well. Please forgive the lack of quoting, but I haven't the time to stumble around this thread looking for the users who sparked my desire.

The "I only treat others as they treat me" claim is a lie. I personally witnessed one occasion where a user bogged down by real life managed to get a fair bit of work done on site, and decided to alert his contributors on the forum while patting himself on the back. TJChurch proceeded to harass this user and made him realize the small scale of this work. The potential motives I could establish were envy and anger; either TJCurch was jealous of this user's ability to accomplish something, or was infuriated that his time was wasted reading about this personal victory.

No, wicker and TJChurch are not the same person. TJChurch is the antithesis of a regular writer. Due to his needless extensions of the simplest elements and his involvement in collaborative fiction, he generally ignores action and scenery, placing characters in blank rooms and having them stand motionless while taking, thereby concluding a thread of "average length" before anything has actually happened. On the other hand, wicker is best described as a rookie with potential. There's mild creativity and brevity, but no verbosity. The story actually goes somewhere, but it's rather cold. Also, for another difference between them, wicker has actually grown. His descriptions may not be artistic, but he no longer has the characters describe the scene.

L.E. stands for Law Enfarcement, TJChurch's first musical. Good luck finding it online, as an unrelated Facebook page shares the same name. The remaining Google searches lead to his blog.

In truth, the mob I described "rubbing his face in the dirt" was not you good people. In truth, I didn't find out about you until the start of November. The group in question was comprised of LitErotica users TJChurch had managed to annoy to the point of mob justice. It was exaggerated for the sake of lifting my comrade's spirits, though not really false; there were almost double the users in this new group of Church haters, and they were dealing with him constantly. Admittedly, I'm amazed anyone drew the conclusion of you since I mentioned people taking delight in TJChurch and another troll distracting each other. I never would have pegged any of you as trolls.

Should he have written for a newspaper that was not a school newspaper, I do know the likely contender, but that would be doxing. Therefore, I'll reserve that knowledge for a PM request. Like I said though, it's just the best shot, not a confirmed victory, and that's assuming there actually is such an article.

At long last, answering the burning question concerning his proof of his intelligence, the proof is you keep asking for it. The way things work in the realm of TJChurch is very simple, and inspired by something he likely read in grade school: "The Emperor's New Clothes." If you can't see it, you must not be intelligent. And the ending is exactly same: the emperor has no clothes. It's his only form of debating, and if you can back him into a corner, you might be able to force his hand and admit this himself - though he'll claim this had been his position all along.

Did I touch a nerve by saying you live in your Mother's basement? Was I wrong? Then that wasn't a lie; I can't be called a liar if I am wrong about an assumption.

Not true. Not for TJChurch anyway. He and I got into a contest where the first to post a lie would forfeit any rights, but his ruling was my victory claim was a lie, not a mistake; it only became a false claim when TJChurch rewrote the rules to say reposts of deleted messages did not count if they were first written days ago...after I called him on the reposted lie. But why bring logic into it? Anything that isn't true is automatically a lie since the whole world is black and white.

Should there be any other questions, I'll be happy to answer. I hope to read more soon.

Oh, and TJChurch. By all means, come at me. Now that I lack both the power and obligation to delete your posts, we're free to duel with minimal restriction.

 

[Dynamite Ninja]

Howdy, folks! While my username here is deductionotaku, I'm certain the focal point of this thread would know me better as Kaitou1412, the man who religiously deletes his off-topic posts from our original forum at LitErotica. I happen to stumble across this thread thanks to a link in a user's signature, and my goodness! I have thoroughly enjoyed catching up on my old problem.

Now then, several questions were posed across this thread, and I can answer a few of them. Additionally, certain comments stuck out when I read them, so allow me to address those as well. Please forgive the lack of quoting, but I haven't the time to stumble around this thread looking for the users who sparked my desire.

The "I only treat others as they treat me" claim is a lie. I personally witnessed one occasion where a user bogged down by real life managed to get a fair bit of work done on site, and decided to alert his contributors on the forum while patting himself on the back. TJChurch proceeded to harass this user and made him realize the small scale of this work. The potential motives I could establish were envy and anger; either TJCurch was jealous of this user's ability to accomplish something, or was infuriated that his time was wasted reading about this personal victory.

No, wicker and TJChurch are not the same person. TJChurch is the antithesis of a regular writer. Due to his needless extensions of the simplest elements and his involvement in collaborative fiction, he generally ignores action and scenery, placing characters in blank rooms and having them stand motionless while taking, thereby concluding a thread of "average length" before anything has actually happened. On the other hand, wicker is best described as a rookie with potential. There's mild creativity and brevity, but no verbosity. The story actually goes somewhere, but it's rather cold. Also, for another difference between them, wicker has actually grown. His descriptions may not be artistic, but he no longer has the characters describe the scene.

L.E. stands for Law Enfarcement, TJChurch's first musical. Good luck finding it online, as an unrelated Facebook page shares the same name. The remaining Google searches lead to his blog.

In truth, the mob I described "rubbing his face in the dirt" was not you good people. In truth, I didn't find out about you until the start of November. The group in question was comprised of LitErotica users TJChurch had managed to annoy to the point of mob justice. It was exaggerated for the sake of lifting my comrade's spirits, though not really false; there were almost double the users in this new group of Church haters, and they were dealing with him constantly. Admittedly, I'm amazed anyone drew the conclusion of you since I mentioned people taking delight in TJChurch and another troll distracting each other. I never would have pegged any of you as trolls.

Should he have written for a newspaper that was not a local newspaper, I do know the likely contender, but that would be doxing. Therefore, I'll reserve that knowledge for a PM request. Like I said though, it's just the best shot, not a confirmed victory, and that's assuming there actually is such an article.

At long last, answering the burning question concerning his proof of his intelligence, the proof is you keep asking for it. The way things work in the realm of TJChurch is very simple, and inspired by something he likely read in grade school: "The Emperor's New Clothes." If you can't see it, you must not be intelligent. And the ending is exactly same: the emperor has no clothes. It's his only form of debating, and if you can back him into a corner, you might be able to force his hand and admit this himself - though he'll claim this had been his position all along.



Not true. Not for TJChurch anyway. He and I got into a contest where the first to post a lie would forfeit any rights, but his ruling was my victory claim was a lie, not a mistake; it only became a false claim when TJChurch rewrote the rules to say reposts of deleted messages did not count if they were first written days ago...after I called him on the reposted lie. But why bring logic into it? Anything that isn't true is automatically a lie since the whole world is black and white.

Should there be any other questions, I'll be happy to answer. I hope to read more soon.

Oh, and TJChurch. By all means, come at me. Now that I lack both the power and obligation to delete your posts, we're free to duel with minimal restriction.

 

[Chuggernaut]

He posts under his own name. Wouldn't posting his article from a non-local paper be LESS of a doxxing since it won't tell us the town he lives in and we already know his real name?

 

[Some JERK]

Howdy, folks! While my username here is deductionotaku, I'm certain the focal point of this thread would know me better as Kaitou1412, the man who religiously deletes his off-topic posts from our original forum at LitErotica. I happen to stumble across this thread thanks to a link in a user's signature, and my goodness! I have thoroughly enjoyed catching up on my old problem.

Now then, several questions were posed across this thread, and I can answer a few of them. Additionally, certain comments stuck out when I read them, so allow me to address those as well. Please forgive the lack of quoting, but I haven't the time to stumble around this thread looking for the users who sparked my desire.

The "I only treat others as they treat me" claim is a lie. I personally witnessed one occasion where a user bogged down by real life managed to get a fair bit of work done on site, and decided to alert his contributors on the forum while patting himself on the back. TJChurch proceeded to harass this user and made him realize the small scale of this work. The potential motives I could establish were envy and anger; either TJCurch was jealous of this user's ability to accomplish something, or was infuriated that his time was wasted reading about this personal victory.

No, wicker and TJChurch are not the same person. TJChurch is the antithesis of a regular writer. Due to his needless extensions of the simplest elements and his involvement in collaborative fiction, he generally ignores action and scenery, placing characters in blank rooms and having them stand motionless while taking, thereby concluding a thread of "average length" before anything has actually happened. On the other hand, wicker is best described as a rookie with potential. There's mild creativity and brevity, but no verbosity. The story actually goes somewhere, but it's rather cold. Also, for another difference between them, wicker has actually grown. His descriptions may not be artistic, but he no longer has the characters describe the scene.

L.E. stands for Law Enfarcement, TJChurch's first musical. Good luck finding it online, as an unrelated Facebook page shares the same name. The remaining Google searches lead to his blog.

In truth, the mob I described "rubbing his face in the dirt" was not you good people. In truth, I didn't find out about you until the start of November. The group in question was comprised of LitErotica users TJChurch had managed to annoy to the point of mob justice. It was exaggerated for the sake of lifting my comrade's spirits, though not really false; there were almost double the users in this new group of Church haters, and they were dealing with him constantly. Admittedly, I'm amazed anyone drew the conclusion of you since I mentioned people taking delight in TJChurch and another troll distracting each other. I never would have pegged any of you as trolls.

Should he have written for a newspaper that was not a local newspaper, I do know the likely contender, but that would be doxing. Therefore, I'll reserve that knowledge for a PM request. Like I said though, it's just the best shot, not a confirmed victory, and that's assuming there actually is such an article.

At long last, answering the burning question concerning his proof of his intelligence, the proof is you keep asking for it. The way things work in the realm of TJChurch is very simple, and inspired by something he likely read in grade school: "The Emperor's New Clothes." If you can't see it, you must not be intelligent. And the ending is exactly same: the emperor has no clothes. It's his only form of debating, and if you can back him into a corner, you might be able to force his hand and admit this himself - though he'll claim this had been his position all along.



Not true. Not for TJChurch anyway. He and I got into a contest where the first to post a lie would forfeit any rights, but his ruling was my victory claim was a lie, not a mistake; it only became a false claim when TJChurch rewrote the rules to say reposts of deleted messages did not count if they were first written days ago...after I called him on the reposted lie. But why bring logic into it? Anything that isn't true is automatically a lie since the whole world is black and white.

Should there be any other questions, I'll be happy to answer. I hope to read more soon.

Oh, and TJChurch. By all means, come at me. Now that I lack both the power and obligation to delete your posts, we're free to duel with minimal restriction.

>Player-2-has-entered-the-game.gif



@Cowlick , let's assume for a second that you're 100% correct, and that you are, by a wide margin, the most intelligent person to post on these forums. What do you gain by anyone knowing that? What do you lose by someone not recognizing it? If, for example, you were an established figure in academia and a respected peer was going around assailing your intelligence, then I can see mounting a ceaseless defense against them. In that case, it's actually important that your colleagues know the truth. But you're nobody arguing with a forum of strangers over something that shouldn't affect you in any way. Do you just like arguing with people? If so, then you should probably try to improve, because you're not good at this at all.

 

[Phil Ken Sebben]

1B] Also, let's make these things work both ways: If people want proof my intelligence is greater than theirs, I'd like to see any of you prove it is not. Also, since it appears you are now asking for me to apologize for lying, I would like an apology for the same thing from each of you, one for each lie you have told (starting with the claim some of you have made of having intelligence not simply equal to mine, but superior to mine).

Yeah, that's not how it works. You're making the positive claim. This means it's up to you to prove it. We actually just have to sit back and let you do provide the evidence which you never have.

But please, I'll ask you again: What do you consider to be intelligence? By what do you measure it? By deeds? By accomplishments? There ought to be something you can point to which can be used for evidence of this.

 

[ON 190]

Howdy, folks! While my username here is deductionotaku, I'm certain the focal point of this thread would know me better as Kaitou1412, the man who religiously deletes his off-topic posts from our original forum at LitErotica. I happen to stumble across this thread thanks to a link in a user's signature, and my goodness! I have thoroughly enjoyed catching up on my old problem.

My completely condolences for having to deal with Admiral Church of the 6th Battle Group for so long. Can I buy you a drink?

(No, really, I'll seriously buy you a drink)

 

[Bucharest]

1B] Also, let's make these things work both ways: If people want proof my intelligence is greater than theirs, I'd like to see any of you prove it is not. Also, since it appears you are now asking for me to apologize for lying, I would like an apology for the same thing from each of you, one for each lie you have told (starting with the claim some of you have made of having intelligence not simply equal to mine, but superior to mine).

Nope.

I'm not going to apologize for not being a pervert who writes erotic 'literature' yet obviously has no idea how human anatomy or social interactions work. I will not apologize for not being a 'writer' who, despite being obligated to know better, writes like a seventh grader at best. Further, I will not apologize for not relying on faulty logic to poorly defend an abstraction of the idea that I might be smarter than anyone based on evidence that probably doesn't exist. Consequently, I will not apologize for not understanding that the concept of 'intelligence' doesn't even work that way.

In the end, I will not apologize for being of greater intelligence than you, TJ. I would prove it--however, the situation is that not only would you not understand the evidence cited to support such a claim, you don't even deserve to see it.

 

[ON 190]

In the end, I will not apologize for being of greater intelligence than you, TJ. I would prove it--however, the situation is that not only would you not understand the evidence cited to support such a claim, you don't even deserve to see it.

He would deny that your proof is real.

 

[Le Bateleur]

TJ - I am deeply, sincerely apologetic for my claim of having intelligence equal-to-&/or-superior-to your own.

I am truly sorry that this objectively factual claim causes you such anguish.

 

[CatParty]

Also, let's make these things work both ways: If people want proof my intelligence is greater than theirs, I'd like to see any of you prove it is not.

any intelligent person would have ignored a place that is clearly meant to antagonize

 

[ON 190]

I would like an apology for the same thing from each of you, one for each lie you have told (starting with the claim some of you have made of having intelligence not simply equal to mine, but superior to mine).

I apologize that, thus far, I have not demanded that you BOW BEFORE MY MASSIVE INTELLECT.

btw, this is you:

Spoiler

 

[DespicableFool]

I apologize that, thus far, I have not demanded that you BOW BEFORE MY MASSIVE INTELLECT.

btw, this is you:

Spoiler

Wait, which one?