Diver165
Well-Known Member
Because she had better be gettin the beer first!
is this CONSIDERED lying or not?
- Thread starter corrales_305
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
- Status
Because she had better be gettin the beer first!
MyNameIsPaul
Well-Known Member
The Mailman: "Yes, let's! Although, I must warn you...while our lucid affair is as hot as a firecracker, I last as long as a bottle rocket"
The Woman: "ZOMG!"
And that seals the deal... AZ_IPA is PERFECT for this role.
This had so much potential until you had to get all "reality" on us.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
MyNameIsPaul
Well-Known Member
ufia?
Please do me a favor, go to this site:
Marriage Help Program For Couples
This saved my marriage and improved my life and my relationship with my wife.
Do not give up.
You don't have to be catholic or christian or even religious you just have to want your marriage to succeed.
Thanks
George
I think there are varying degrees of lying and they should be recognized when you're deciding whether to be pissed off or not. It sounds like she was just blowing you off because she either didn't approve of why you wanted to talk to the person (and didn't feel like getting into a drawn out argument over fireworks) or she was involved in something else and didn't feel like looking up the number for you. If it was the latter, it's annoying but I don't think it should trigger a pimp hand.
dallasdb
Well-Known Member
She may lie but... does she does the dishes, the laundry, clean the house, and cook?
Even if she only did 2/4 I'd be pretty happy!
Even if she only did 2/4 I'd be pretty happy!
I've learned a lot today...not from this thread mind you.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
- Messages
- 14,612
- Reaction score
- 3,600
bernerbrau
Well-Known Member
OP: Marital. Counseling. srsly.
Or just break it off. Either way it sounds like you need to grow the f*ck up.
Or just break it off. Either way it sounds like you need to grow the f*ck up.
hiphops
Well-Known Member
It all depends on what she means what she said the person changed her phone. When she said that, was she merely aware of the fact that the phone number changed? Or, did she know more than that; that is, did she know not only that the phone number changed but what is was before she changed her phone number? If its the later, then she's a liar. If its the former, then she's not.
The question was whether she had someone's telephone number. Her response was that she did not have that phone number. The issue as to whether she's a liar is whether, when she said she did not have that phone number, she actually did have that phone number.
Although she did state that she could get the phone number from facebook whenever she wanted, from the facts presented, it appears as if she never actually did. In other words, it appears as if, from the facts presented, she never actually went into facebook and obtained that phone number, even though, according to her, she could have done that. As a result, it appears as if she never had that phone number and, therefore, was not lying when asked whether she had that phone number.
However, that's not the end of the analysis.
She then goes on to state that this person changed her phone number a month ago. (Just so we are clear, for the purposes of this reply, I'm going to highlight that the question whether she had the phone number was asked after that person changed her phone number, which from the facts presented appears to be the case, as you indicated that a week passed since the time you asked whether she had this phone number and the time she said that the phone number changed a month ago. Had it been before, that would be a different issue. That is, if you asked what the person's phone number was on 1 January to which she says she doesn't know and then in 7 January that person changed her number, that's irrelevant to her state of knowledge on 1 January when asked whether she had that phone number at that time; the subsequent intervening event on 7 January says nothing about her state of knowledge before that event on 1 January. But, because this later situation isn't the case from the facts presented, I'll move on.)
On the one hand, when she said this person changed her phone number, she could be aware that this person changed her phone number without knowing what the phone number was in the first place. For instance, its possible that I could know that you changed your socks without knowing what socks you were wearing before you changed them (i.e., the socks you are wearing smell nice or you could have told me that you just changed your socks.) If that's the case, then she was not lying when asked whether she had that phone number. In this situation, she did not have that phone number; she just knew that, whatever the phone number was, it changed.
On the other hand, when she said the phone number changed, she could have been aware of the fact that this person changed her phone number and what the number was before she changed it (and even what the new number is, although that's irrelevant in this fact pattern, as the issue is what the phone number was before it was changed, not after it was changed). Back to the changing of the socks example, its possible I could know that you changed your socks because you were wearing black socks but are now wearing white socks. If its the latter, then she was lying when asked whether she had that person's phone number: she knew what it was, she was aware of the fact that it changed and, when she said she did not know what the phone number was in response to your question, she was lying.
So, if you really want to know whether she was lying, you're gonna have to ask that follow up question . . . when you said that she changed it a month ago, did you know what that phone number was before she changed it?
But, here's the most crucial point: Lighten up brother. Have a homebrew.
The question was whether she had someone's telephone number. Her response was that she did not have that phone number. The issue as to whether she's a liar is whether, when she said she did not have that phone number, she actually did have that phone number.
Although she did state that she could get the phone number from facebook whenever she wanted, from the facts presented, it appears as if she never actually did. In other words, it appears as if, from the facts presented, she never actually went into facebook and obtained that phone number, even though, according to her, she could have done that. As a result, it appears as if she never had that phone number and, therefore, was not lying when asked whether she had that phone number.
However, that's not the end of the analysis.
She then goes on to state that this person changed her phone number a month ago. (Just so we are clear, for the purposes of this reply, I'm going to highlight that the question whether she had the phone number was asked after that person changed her phone number, which from the facts presented appears to be the case, as you indicated that a week passed since the time you asked whether she had this phone number and the time she said that the phone number changed a month ago. Had it been before, that would be a different issue. That is, if you asked what the person's phone number was on 1 January to which she says she doesn't know and then in 7 January that person changed her number, that's irrelevant to her state of knowledge on 1 January when asked whether she had that phone number at that time; the subsequent intervening event on 7 January says nothing about her state of knowledge before that event on 1 January. But, because this later situation isn't the case from the facts presented, I'll move on.)
On the one hand, when she said this person changed her phone number, she could be aware that this person changed her phone number without knowing what the phone number was in the first place. For instance, its possible that I could know that you changed your socks without knowing what socks you were wearing before you changed them (i.e., the socks you are wearing smell nice or you could have told me that you just changed your socks.) If that's the case, then she was not lying when asked whether she had that phone number. In this situation, she did not have that phone number; she just knew that, whatever the phone number was, it changed.
On the other hand, when she said the phone number changed, she could have been aware of the fact that this person changed her phone number and what the number was before she changed it (and even what the new number is, although that's irrelevant in this fact pattern, as the issue is what the phone number was before it was changed, not after it was changed). Back to the changing of the socks example, its possible I could know that you changed your socks because you were wearing black socks but are now wearing white socks. If its the latter, then she was lying when asked whether she had that person's phone number: she knew what it was, she was aware of the fact that it changed and, when she said she did not know what the phone number was in response to your question, she was lying.
So, if you really want to know whether she was lying, you're gonna have to ask that follow up question . . . when you said that she changed it a month ago, did you know what that phone number was before she changed it?
But, here's the most crucial point: Lighten up brother. Have a homebrew.
So, you are trying to catch her lying!! This relationship is probably already over!
Be a man and DROP IT or move on to a new relationship before this gets really ugly!
Should have read the next 11 pages of responses.
1) troll (most likely)
2) someone with serious trust issues.
3) marriage that is over except for the divorce
This soap opera has the possibility of many spin-offs. Can we write the scripts here and spit the royalties?
How can we get the wife, the friend, the friends husband and the mailman together in one scene?
bernerbrau
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure I saw a late-night film on Cinemax that started like this, but anger quickly gave way to nakedness and poorly simulated acts of pleasure.
OP
OP
corrales_305
Well-Known Member
Wow...i posted this yesterday...i can believe there is so many post on this subject!!i was bored at home and made this stuff up with a drinking buddy to see if anybody would respond.....every body seems to be an expert in romance on this forum!!!!!i should quit brewing and be the next dr phil...hahhahaha!!!since im a noob to brewing i can't offer much advice on brewing...but im good at coming up with contriversal conversation i guess....im get me a beer right now and see what i come up with next!!!!
hiphops
Well-Known Member
"i was bored at home and made this stuff up with a drinking buddy to see if anybody would respond."
- This is a little tough to believe, given the further explanatory posts you've offered since the original post. I think the more likely situation is that the original post (or some version of it) was what actually occurred and, after posting it, you realized that you were a tool and need a way out.
"every body seems to be an expert in romance on this forum!!!!!"
- Not really. I think most posts are from people who are experts in "common sense."
- This is a little tough to believe, given the further explanatory posts you've offered since the original post. I think the more likely situation is that the original post (or some version of it) was what actually occurred and, after posting it, you realized that you were a tool and need a way out.
"every body seems to be an expert in romance on this forum!!!!!"
- Not really. I think most posts are from people who are experts in "common sense."
brewingmeister
Well-Known Member
Ahh, so you're the liar.
dallasdb
Well-Known Member
I want a divorce.
It's not you it's me... no wait it is you!
It's not you it's me... no wait it is you!
Time for the ban hammer to drop! 
MyNameIsPaul
Well-Known Member
Whatever, kiddo, we know you didn't make this up. For the gene pools sake, I hope you don't breed.
OP
OP
corrales_305
Well-Known Member
hahha u r so funny .....really ....take that sh$# to comic view!!!!
MyNameIsPaul
Well-Known Member
OP
OP
corrales_305
Well-Known Member
no.......really its pretty funny....no sarcasm..i gotta get me one of those pics...very useful for internet bulling
MyNameIsPaul
Well-Known Member
What I find funny is that you and a "drinking buddy" were hanging out at 8:18am thinking of some story to post on a brewing website.
OP
OP
corrales_305
Well-Known Member
the funny part is.... my drinking buddy really is a mail man!!!
MyNameIsPaul
Well-Known Member
I think his "friend" gave him the postal back door.
A little "Good Mornin' Ground & Pound", if you will....
OP
OP
corrales_305
Well-Known Member
it was 10 am here in fl and we were having left over new years beer because it was his last day off!! u see....nothing fishy there!!lol
OP
OP
corrales_305
Well-Known Member
well.....left over beer .........that a bit fishy......there is never any leftover beer....left over roasted pig maybe but not beer...lol!!!
OP
OP
corrales_305
Well-Known Member
omg.....what have i started......a ******** epidemic!!!!!!
MyNameIsPaul
Well-Known Member
I'd like to personally invite you over to the Tap Room. I think you'd have a good'ol time in there.
Looks like you fixed your caps lock button, great job, maybe WD40 that exclamation mark too. It's a repeat offender.
ACESFULL
Well-Known Member
that is all.
bernerbrau
Well-Known Member
That's the textbook definition of trolling. Next...
maffewl
Well-Known Member
Obie Ban Kinobe is thinking...
- Status
