Trainwreck Onision / James Gregory Jackson / Gregory James Daniel/Jackson/Avaroe - Edgy king of the tweens, Vegan with deformed dick, Pedo, Destroying the Environment. Serial Domestic Abuser, Served the wrong Chris Hansen.

[AzuraAquafina]

Wow, not to moral fag but giving people shit for cutting and then turning around and making cutting and suicide a joke is kinda....does he not know what side of that issue he wants to be on?

Taking a stance on a serious issue for Greg is like changing into different equipment sets for better elemental resistances in a JRPG. One tweet he says rape victims support rapist if they don't report immediately and in another tweet, he says rape victims don't report due to their trauma. Really just a matter of convenience.

Although in the case of cutting he's a lot more consistent.

 

[CashMoney!]

He looks really old in that thumbnail. Gross to see what's actually going on behind the filters and high contrast.

 

[NoFeline]

He looks really old in that thumbnail. Gross to see what's actually going on behind the filters and high contrast.

He looks like a 50 year old serial killer with the hands of a woman

 

[PrinceofAllCucks]

View attachment 1280135
He looks like a 50 year old serial killer with the hands of a woman

Jesus Christ, it looks like he has baby hands compared to the size of his Jughead.

 

[madatyou]

Thought he was retiring his face

 

[Water-T]

Thought he was retiring his face

Most likely Grease had an outbreak on his forehead that makeup and filters couldn't obscure, so he opted to cover it up and pulled his "I don't want to be famous for my looks!" explanation out of his ass. Now that it's cleared up (or he snuck out the Swamp Shack to see a skin doc), Grout is back to Zoolandering it up.

For someone who cried about not wanting to be known for their looks, he sure does post a ton of shots of his body...

 

[madatyou]

His audience definitely doesn't remember 24. I doubt Kai does

 

[Observerer]

His audience definitely doesn't remember 24. I doubt Kai does

You would think he understood this, but the retærd is stuck in the 2000s and thinks everyone else is too.

 

[Tard Repository]

I've been asked to take the message down. I apologize, I was not given permission to post it.

Nobody here gives a shit about having permission to post anything here, you faggot. If somebody was dumb enough to send you a message/video/screenshot over the internet you then have free reign to post that shit anywhere you like regardless if they say it's okay or not. Come back when you learn this.

 

[NoFeline]

Nobody here gives a shit about having permission to post anything here, you faggot. If somebody was dumb enough to send you a message/video/screenshot over the internet you then have free reign to post that shit anywhere you like regardless if they say it's okay or not. Come back when you learn this.

You could probably ask a staff member to restore the message. I know that's at least possible in the case of deletions, see also: Stray Sheep

 

[longjohn]

@vinomadefied I can appreciate the sentiment of not posting something without permission, respecting privacy, not leaking info, whatever. That all went away the moment you posted whatever you posted.

The thing is, you said you had permission initially and were even explicitly asked to share it, you posted it to KF of all places intentionally to stir drama between dogfucker and this other person, then you backpeddled on it claiming you never had permission.

Which is it?

@grim darque quoted the original post. What did the attachment say?

 

[grim darque]

@vinomadefied I can appreciate the sentiment of not posting something without permission, respecting privacy, not leaking info, whatever. That all went away the moment you posted whatever you posted.

The thing is, you said you had permission initially and were even explicitly asked to share it, you posted it to KF of all places intentionally to stir drama between dogfucker and this other person, then you backpeddled on it claiming you never had permission.

Which is it?

@grim darque quoted the original post. What did the attachment say?

As far as I remember, the gist of it was basically that Tamara the Dogfucker is a two-faced bitch. Tamara the Dogfucker is the reason whomever wrote the message decided to dramatically flounce away from the oh-so-welcoming, tolerant and friendly Onision Community and no longer financially support the onion or something. But she's totally not some creepy anti-o, guise. She loves onision.

There may have also been some stuff about Jimmy mocking her, too, but I could just be assuming that because he's a cock to everyone he isn't trying to manipulate in to suk mi. Then he immediately resumes being himself.

 

[longjohn]

As far as I remember, the gist of it was basically that Tamara the Dogfucker is a two-faced bitch. Tamara the Dogfucker is the reason whomever wrote the message decided to dramatically flounce away from the oh-so-welcoming, tolerant and friendly Onision Community and no longer financially support the onion or something. But she's totally not some creepy anti-o, guise. She loves onision.

There may have also been some stuff about Jimmy mocking her, too, but I could just be assuming that because he's a cock to everyone he isn't trying to manipulate in to suk mi. Then he immediately resumes being himself.

Ah, okay. So it's safe to assume it was nothing that would justify a delete everything unless this not-creepy-antio wanted to find herself back on good graces with Greg or Dogfucker then? That's a little two-faced and bitchish, if I do say so myself. A little underwhelming.

 

[Tard Repository]

As far as I remember, the gist of it was basically that Tamara the Dogfucker is a two-faced bitch. Tamara the Dogfucker is the reason whomever wrote the message decided to dramatically flounce away from the oh-so-welcoming, tolerant and friendly Onision Community and no longer financially support the onion or something. But she's totally not some creepy anti-o, guise. She loves onision.

There may have also been some stuff about Jimmy mocking her, too, but I could just be assuming that because he's a cock to everyone he isn't trying to manipulate in to suk mi. Then he immediately resumes being himself.

I would expect as much from someone who fucks dogs.

 

[vinomadefied]

@vinomadefied I can appreciate the sentiment of not posting something without permission, respecting privacy, not leaking info, whatever. That all went away the moment you posted whatever you posted.

The thing is, you said you had permission initially and were even explicitly asked to share it, you posted it to KF of all places intentionally to stir drama between dogfucker and this other person, then you backpeddled on it claiming you never had permission.

Which is it?

@grim darque quoted the original post. What did the attachment say?

I gave a vague description of what permission I was granted. I was only asked to share with Tamara. I thought it was informative, however, and shared it here. That was a mistake.

Nobody here gives a shit about having permission to post anything here, you faggot. If somebody was dumb enough to send you a message/video/screenshot over the internet you then have free reign to post that shit anywhere you like regardless if they say it's okay or not. Come back when you learn this.

You are correct that in that, but I know this person, and I realize why they wouldn't want something like that public. They were very upset with me when they saw the post. Tamara went after them for it. They wanted to leave quietly, but I suppose I ruined that. No matter. What's done is done.

 

[RandallBoggs]

What would only showing it to Tamara achieve? Why should she care?
I swear both you anti os and stans are the dumbest people

 

[vinomadefied]

What would only showing it to Tamara achieve? Why should she care?
I swear both you anti os and stans are the dumbest people

They were very upset with her, so I think it was intended as a "fuck you" kind of message.

 

[longjohn]

I gave a vague description of what permission I was granted. I was only asked to share with Tamara. I thought it was informative, however, and shared it here. That was a mistake.

"I was asked to not disclose their name, but they wanted her to see this before they cut ties entirely. They know she frequents the farms, so they've asked me to share what they had to say to her"

That's not vague. I hate to nitpick, but it wasn't a mistake. It doesn't even come off as a misspeak. Why would they want to conceal their identity if it was just going to Tamara anyway? She'd know who tf this other person was, so I'd say there was intent to publicly share this info.

 

[vinomadefied]

"I was asked to not disclose their name, but they wanted her to see this before they cut ties entirely. They know she frequents the farms, so they've asked me to share what they had to say to her"

That's not vague. I hate to nitpick, but it wasn't a mistake. It doesn't even come off as a misspeak. Why would they want to conceal their identity if it was just going to Tamara anyway? She'd know who tf this other person was, so I'd say there was intent to publicly share this info.

I chose to do that. I knew she frequented the farms, and used that to say I had permission. They had no intentions of wanting this publicly shared.

 

[longjohn]

Okay, well none of that makes any sense to me. The motivations don't make sense, the intentions don't make sense, the execution doesn't make sense. It's wishy-washy all around and I have no idea why any of you want to be on good terms with any of these people. Everyone in this is messy as hell and I just don't get it.