are crushes awesome or what?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (528 of them)

View Previous Page...

After that story, do lots of ILX girls now have a crush on Louis?

(just trying to turn this into a crush thread again)

― StanM, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:24 (nineteen years ago)

I'm with Laurel on that subject. ILX would be far less amusing if there weren't the occasional drunk posts.

― Michael White, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:24 (nineteen years ago)

drunken posts=of course

drunken posts about cross dressing and whacking=no

― Mr. Que, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:26 (nineteen years ago)

Con: a crush thread is ruined.
Pro: a drunk thread is spared.

― nickalicious, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:27 (nineteen years ago)

i don't necessarily object to either of wanking or drag! i do object to LJ's prose style, however. that's just embarrassing for everyone.

― elmo argonaut, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:29 (nineteen years ago)

It is not the posting that is a problem, I have met the guy and he is a decent chap but anyone with half a brain, and without balls full of zings is thinking.

Dude, do you or any other of the people involved really want that out on the internet.

Maybe it is a generation gap thing but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't.

― Ed, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:30 (nineteen years ago)

No, I am only a year or two older than him and I wouldn't want it out there either.

― jessie monster, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:31 (nineteen years ago)

It never stopped me from regaling y'all with a story of a cat playing tetherball with my nads.

― Michael White, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:33 (nineteen years ago)

your cat is not likely to have an opinion about that.

Maybe we are being a bit over protective and patronising of young Louis., he certainly doesn't deserve the levels of abuse he gets from some quarters, and quite frankly we have given him fair warning, so he can post what the fuck he likes but maybe a little warning for us prudes would be in order.

― Ed, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:37 (nineteen years ago)

If LJ was funny, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

― elmo argonaut, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:37 (nineteen years ago)

OTM.

― G00blar, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:40 (nineteen years ago)

what ed said, though I would subsitute "prude" for "people not wishing to spoil their mornings by one ill-labeled click"

― Ms Misery, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:42 (nineteen years ago)

the thing that bugs me most is the image at the top of this thread :(

― Taking Cuddlestein Mountain by Strategy, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:43 (nineteen years ago)

I was wondering why this thread kept appearing at the top of the new answers page.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

― Fluffy Bear, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:50 (nineteen years ago)

what ed said, though I would subsitute "prude" for "people not wishing to spoil their mornings by one ill-labeled click

For a split second I didn't see the space between the 'c' and the 'l' in that last word.

― Michael White, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:53 (nineteen years ago)

one ill-labeled c-lick

― Curt1s Stephens, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:54 (nineteen years ago)

ahaha

― elmo argonaut, Monday, 12 March 2007 19:55 (nineteen years ago)

i just don't think ANYONE wants to read about cross dressing wack fests on the internet

ha! this is so very, very wrong that the glare of it almost singed my face.

― m the g, Monday, 12 March 2007 21:25 (nineteen years ago)

congrats louis! how far did it go?

modestmickey on Monday, 12 March 2007 05:03 (16 hours ago)

Guilty rofflez.

― 31g, Monday, 12 March 2007 21:27 (nineteen years ago)

Gah, I was hoping the Louis grody sitch talk had subsided into the skipping messages hyperlink by this point and I could tell everybody how trumpet girl came back over without that guy (whose douchyness isn't unseen by her, awesome) and we made beautiful music and beer drinkenings together, and when she was leaving I think we tried to kiss but then there was this horrible animal dying noise and then we giggled and the kiss moment was ruined, LOL better luck next time.

This is what I came back to check. Go Nick! Keep us posted. ;)

― Hard like armour, Monday, 12 March 2007 22:47 (nineteen years ago)

MW, cat...tetherball...nads...WAHT!

― Hard like armour, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:02 (nineteen years ago)

louis you have nothing to be ashamed of. keep fighting the good fight.

― g®▲Ðұ, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:20 (nineteen years ago)

louis jagger rules

― A B C, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:21 (nineteen years ago)

louis jagger should get a livejournal

― 597, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:24 (nineteen years ago)

think people are over-reacting over louis once again.

i can think of at least one or two other ILXors who have given more explicit anecdotes over the years - and using their real names too, without other people doing so.

― blueski, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:29 (nineteen years ago)

I know what you mean, but there have never been such explicit stories involving a 20-year old virgin who has pretty much gone around with a large sign saying "LOOK AT ME!" to the extent he's posted about the aforementioned incident on the night it happened.

More importantly, this is the only time I can think of when the original poster will be hugely ashamed of this being on the internet sooner rather than later.

Really, what Louis has to do now is forget whatever he was planning to do and focus wholeheartedly on a career when such formative experiences are expected and desirable. Like becoming the next generation's Steven Fry or something.

Ronan: mean seriously you're on some Dickensian bumbling oaf shit when you get drunk if you think people are going all clap their hands in delight and go "oh my dear fellow you cad" or maybe at worst venture a "good heavens ; )"

Give it time, Ned hasn't posted here yet...

― Matt DC, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:50 (nineteen years ago)

this story is not shocking really, it's just tawdry and dumb and the retelling makes it seem as though the whole thing was meant as a performance to talk about later, i agree, if lj was funny this would be different but he is no evelyn waugh is he, he is just an annoying but probably pleasant enough boy trying to make a splash on the internet (and not on the chap sitting next to him). some of the criticism and warnings about how he has ruined his future seem a bit homophobic. i cheered when the naked girl upped sticks, she was clearly the brains of the outfit.

― estela, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:53 (nineteen years ago)

Dude if you're really lucky there'll be a serial killer called L0u1s J4gger in the next few years and then no one will pay the blindest bit of attention to anything they read about you on the internet. Of course you'd have to change your name by deed poll but you'll probably need to do that anyway.

― Matt DC, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:56 (nineteen years ago)

lol

― ^@^, Monday, 12 March 2007 23:57 (nineteen years ago)

louis gets really excited about things in a very sincere way.

just look at the way he talks about music.

look at how he relishes in jessie's disdain for him.

so when you're someone who's 20 years old and wasted and have never kissed a girl or had sex or whatever and then you go and have a night like he had, well this is what happens.

just think, we still have his de-flowering to look forward to.

― g®▲Ðұ, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 00:58 (nineteen years ago)

Will we hear about it here or will that be a thread all of its own I wonder?

― Hard like armour, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 01:04 (nineteen years ago)

MOST CHILLING POST/USERNAME JUXTAPOSITION OF MARCH 2007

― HI DERE, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 01:05 (nineteen years ago)

Louis Jagger's jingle is going to be priceless.

― kenan, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 01:09 (nineteen years ago)

also, Dan OTM on this thread.

― g®▲Ðұ, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 01:10 (nineteen years ago)

jesus, i sure wish i had read this before i posted about MY eventful weekend. yet again, i am nothing but an ilx footnote.

i feel genuinely sorry for l0u15, he's very naive and not so much a prick as i was at twenty, as far as i can tell.

― darraghmac, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 01:17 (nineteen years ago)

i am so thankful for this thread entertaining me on such an awful, awful day.

― homosexual II, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 01:36 (nineteen years ago)

i cast a vote of confidence for louis jagger

― modestmickey, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 03:30 (nineteen years ago)

How is this board so poorly equipped to deal with one goofy-ass 20-year-old

― A B C, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 04:02 (nineteen years ago)

dear lj –

until this point we have had no interaction. no beef, no amor. but i must tell you, and i mean no disrespect, i have some poignant words for you. stop posting the personal shit. it'll come back and bite you in the ass. more than anybody else on the board i can attest to that fact. if you're like i was, you might say 'hell, i've nothing to hide' - but you're wrong. just because you're ostensibly honest and trusting doesn't mean that anybody who reads your private airings will feel compelled to respond with the same honor, the same trust. as direct as the line was from your private cogitation, viz. 'i'll tell 'em what strange crap i got up to this weekend' to the act of opening a browser window, firing up ILX, plicking the keyboard a bit, whacking the submit response button and then reloading the page – that's how easy the same line of action will be for somebody whose initial cogitation is something along the of 'i kinda feel like fucking with louis jagger.' and lord knows there's enough jerkoffs around here that'll do that kinda thing. be careful kid, don't give 'em the opportunity. i hate to say something like 'you're asking for it' but speaking personally re. a rather infamous ILX experience of two years ago i can't say you're not.

― remy bean, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 04:48 (nineteen years ago)

DON'T STOP HIM BEFORE POPPAGE

OUR GRAND EMOTIONAL INVESTMENT NEEDS CLOSURE

― energy flash gordon, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 06:06 (nineteen years ago)

I doubt LJ is going to worry about what some random trolls in other countries he's never going to meet think or say about him when they come across this thread five years hence.

― Marcello Carlin, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 08:04 (nineteen years ago)

I would like to offer g®?Ð? and myself as floating heads of conscience. Which do you want, g®?Ð?, horns or wings?

― Ed, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 08:13 (nineteen years ago)

louis's only option is to become very famous very quickly so that the ilx mentions are pushed into the lower reaches of the google rankings.

― That one guy that quit, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 09:53 (nineteen years ago)

Drunken Cambridge students in homoerotic group hijinks non-shocker. This is a huge fuss over pretty much nothing.

― Scik Mouthy, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 10:09 (nineteen years ago)

the whole thing was meant as a performance to talk about later

Oh yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. *sigh*

Much as Ed and Gr4dy would be most excellent floating heads of conscience, I'm kinda with Enr1que on this. :-D

And cheers Remy for some honest, forthright advice that doesn't resort to abuse (unlike a few people upthread who have hopefully now stopped reading).

― unfished business, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 10:11 (nineteen years ago)

I don't know about g-symbol-y, but Ed's hair alone would make him worth having as a floating head of conscience. Plus he is hi-viz, so you would always be able to find the lock on your front door, even in the dark. I recommend him.

― accentmonkey, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 10:14 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, N1ck, of course it was a huge fuss over nothing. I was merely answering M1ckey's question of how far it went. The rest was down to OMG LOL WTF ILXors. I can't be blamed for being excited enough to chronicle my first pull, although I may have erred in recording its circumstances.

The worst thing done here is the use of my name without Googleproofing. GRRRR.

― unfished business, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 10:15 (nineteen years ago)

No. The worst thing is your denial.

― kv_nol, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 10:17 (nineteen years ago)

i do wonder about how future politicians etc will get round this kind of thing because even if they don't deliberately post revealing things about their sex/drugs lives on the internets, it'll be much harder to keep stuff on the down-low. that said, the circles tonly blairs was moving in in the early 70s -- i guess there's a kind of islington omerta thing going on. political hacks just keep quiet about things in the uk, though how long for i don't know. recently with the shocking revelation that an oxford student smoked pot the columnists were all 'yeah-yeah, no-one cares'. the hell they don't!

― That one guy that quit, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 10:17 (nineteen years ago)

By which I mean: Cop on.

― kv_nol, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 10:18 (nineteen years ago)

Skipping 428 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.