Sep
11
Uma Thurman, 39, and her French billionaire fiancé Arpad Busson, 46, are reportedly getting married next June at Kensington Palace, where Princess Diana once lived. Their guest list includes Sir Elton John, Sting, Claudia Schiffer and Elizabeth Hurley. Uma, who has been married twice before, has two children from her marriage to Ethan Hawke, while Arpad, who has never been married, has two sons from a relationship with model Elle McPherson. A co-founder of the children’s charity ARK, Busson reportedly never married McPherson, despite getting engaged when she was pregnant with their second child, because he decided he couldn’t marry a model. Does he realize Thurman is a former model? [Poll=137]
|
More news: Uma Thurman |
Comments
32 Comments so far
who writes these little articles? are you kidding me? seriously. do you even know what you’re talking about? whoever you are, get a real job.
What’s wrong with the article? You know, for the life of me, I cannot understand WHY people come on here, read the articles, then b!tch and whine about them…that they are not good enough. It doesn’t make sense. WHY do you come here to read “these little articles”?
what do you care? i wasn’t talking to you. get over it.
Obviously you care more than I do…
whatever, if you are going to make a general comment for all to see, then expect to get some response from others. If you were not talking to Nancy or anyone else, then who were you talking to? If you were talking directly to the writer of the article and don’t want anyone else’s opinion, then send an email directly to Tribute, don’t put it in a public forum.
Nancy is perfectly right to ask what is wrong with the article. If you believe there is something factually wrong with it, then say what it is. If you are going to make a negative comment, at least be clear with your point.
yeah, come on, whatever…I mean at the very least we have come to expect momentous vital celebrity “news” i.e. 24K gilded cage gerbil dwellings….haha
carry on, whatever….your comments are your own, no explanation necessary…
Oh, you’re so smart, Jo-WAnne! I bet everyone wishes they were as smart as you and could figure out that they don’t have to give explanations if they don’t want to.
LMFAO!
Click my name, Jo-WAnne.
What.. read the articles… get serious. I come here to read the comments… and I love it!!!
Everyone has their own opinion and they have the right to put it on tribute. If your bullying someone(Nancy), get a friecking life. Oh yeah, you don’t have one.
Also, these days a lot of celebrities can’t make a fully commitment in their marriage. Very sad……
Oh come on, cindy! I just gave my “own opinion” so who am I “bullying” (cindy)? Do you even know the definition of “bullying”, cindy?
bully = Nancy…
Maybe we can give them a gerbil house for their wedding gift.
Seriously, Nancy didn’t say anything wrong, just a question, why come on if you don’t like the articles…woop de do, leave her be. it’s between her and the dude who doesn’t like the article.
Hey Nancy, your always picking on someone’s opinion. Let the person say whatever they want on the tribute article. If you have something to say about the tribute article, please go ahead and express it, but if your gonna pick on other people’s opinion, grow up. If you want me to give you the definition of BULLYING, I will gladly send you the definitions of that word.
By the way, I love the tribute articles, I learn something from it every time I have a chance to read them. I use these tribute articles for my university classes assignments.
Actually Cindy, I’m not “always picking on someone’s opinion on the Tribute article”, so you should “grow up” yourself. I asked this ‘whatever’ a question ABOUT THE ARTICLE, I never picked on his/her opinion nor did I “BULLY” him/her. So, go right ahead and send the definition of “BULLYING” and while you are at it, send some proof of me “picking on someone’s opinion on the Tribute article”. Back up your big mouth…they should teach people that in university…you would fail by far.
Oh sorry, is what I just said, telling you the way it is, considered “BULLYING”? LMAO!
I call it the TRUTH but then, they do say that some people can’t handle the truth, right?
have to agree with you there Nance, your mirror is rock
solid proof of that…
Hello there Nancy
I have tonnes of proof from people who felt bullied by you. At the moment, I am doing my masters and I am in fact doing very well. What you have just said about me is completely fine because I am taking the truth like a MAN and being a GROWN UP by getting off the computer and doing something wisely in life instead of sitting on the computer and complaining about people’s comments every day. Your not bullying me right now, your just being ridiculus. Your lucky your on a public forum on tribute. Anyways, I have to do an essay on issues on the internet. Nancy, I will see you on the next tribute article.
Hello Nancy supporters
If your really bored, check out Nancy’s conversations in all of the tribute article comment pages. I have fun reading them.
Good for you, cindy. I’m glad you like reading my comments but, don’t go thinking that you’re better than me just because you are at the moment in university. I’ve already sailed that ship years ago. Why am I lucky that I’m on a public forum, cindy? Are you a guy, cindy? Just wondering because you said you’re “taking the truth like a MAN”. Why do you feel the need to hide yourself behind the name of a female? Is the reason you say I am lucky that I am on a public forum because you’d like to go ‘Chris Brown’ on me? Hahahaha…you big bully!
It is obvious that people are “picking on” others not because of what they say, but because who says it. Believe me, I disagree with a lot of what Nancy has to say, and I have indeed challenged her on some of her opinions. But in this case, to say that she is bullying and questioning someone’s right to an opinion based on her first posting is unfair. Whatever was not giving an opinion on the article, but making a direct attack on the writer. This in itself might be fair game, but I don’t think it is fair when the reason for the “opinion” isn’t explained — if you criticize someone, at least say WHY you are criticizing them. Whatever was not giving a fair and reasoned opinion — he/she just fell into name-calling. And I think Nancy is justified in questioning that.
It is only after others start accusing Nancy of being a bully that she begins her (unfortunate) efforts to “explain” herself. Nancy, I like reading your opinions on matters, even when I disagree with them, (and I can often guess your position before you write it) but the gibes at others (and the others towards you) gets pretty tiresome.
Comments and opinions don’t necessarily have to relate to the article directly, but keep the personal arrows out of it. (And that is directed to everyone, not just Nancy.)
cindy is better than you re expressing herself….your CB comment proves that…bully
The flea that bit my neighbours dogs @$$ is better than you, Jo-WAnne…just can’t shut it and mind your BEEswax, can you? LMFAO!
burst your bubble, Sept. 14 10:57 AM: I totally agree with the first line of your comment (which was not on here earlier, before the comments after yours..??). I’ve been saying that for months to certain people and they have totally denied it. “It’s nice to see someone finally gets it”. LOL. I’ve also basically said the rest of your comment as well…that I usually respect people until they disrespect me…then it’s a free for all. After that I don’t care anymore. If they want my respect, have fun EARNING it!
“Whatever was not giving a fair and reasoned opinion — he/she just fell into name-calling”
where did that happen RE THIS ARTICLE, byb?
Jo-Anne,
I was referring to the first comment on this article, where whatever only says:
“who writes these little articles? are you kidding me? seriously. do you even know what you’re talking about? whoever you are, get a real job.”
I see that as a personal attack on someone with nothing to justify the comment. As I said, I don’t mind criticism, but it should be based on something factual and explained, and not an unexplained insult to an individual.
I still don’t know what his/her problem is with the article, or with the writer.
oh….I specifically took issue with the “name calling” part of your comment a) cuz there was none and b? curious why such a comment could be made in view of your defended party…odd
also, and maybe you’ll never know what his/her problem is with the writer…let’s face it, if everyone were to justify every comment of theirs re unfavourable opinion on articles on here, on here we’d be looking not only a very boring commentary, but an unnecessarily lengthy one…in my opinion…
so, they didn’t care for it…so what?
Jo-Anne,
You are correct that there wasn’t really “name calling” in the comment. I used the term loosely, as I do believe it was a personal attack akin to name calling.
I’m not quite clear on your second point about a comment in view of my defended party. However, believe me, I’m not generally a defender of Nancy, and certainly not of most of the comments she made later in the posts. I have challenged her on some of her comments before. But I think her first post was a legitimate response to a non-specific comment. I believe is someone without a “history” on this site said the exact same thing Nancy did, the replies would not have been the same.
I disagree that justifying a comment would lead to boring and lengthy posts (as I’m sure many will say mine are!). My point, which I would like to emphasize, is that if one makes a comment, be clear about what you are saying and why.
I believe public forums like this one are to debate and exchange ideas. And anyone should be able to comment on any other comment. Telling people “it is none of your business” or “butt out” is simply wrong. If someone wants a private conversation with someone, do it in private.
To your question of if they don’t care for it… so what? my reply would be: if they don’t care to explain or debate a certain comment, why make the comment in the first place?
“I’m not quite clear on your second point about a comment in view of my defended party”…you seem VERY clear to me judging by your follow up sentences…I ask you why the suggested confusion over my remark?
“Telling people “it is none of your business” or “butt out” is simply wrong.” Even though I enjoy many of your posts, and do believe you respond with maturity and intelligence, I disagree with you here. The only “wrong” I feel on any public forum is when comments degrade into inappropriate vulgarity. I hardly think these tepid, mild “butt outs” etc. qualify for that.
the “why make the comment” question – my response…simply because it is a public forum and that’s their opinion, take it or leave it. You may ask for an explanation however if they do not give one, that’s their choice. No wrong committed.
thanks for your response, like I said I enjoy reading an intelligent response…particularly in light of above drivel…
And there’s “no wrong committed” in asking the person a question either, is there? So…what is the justification for the “bully” comments then?
You say, “The only “wrong” I feel on any public forum is when comments degrade into inappropriate vulgarity. I hardly think these tepid, mild “butt outs” etc. qualify for that.” Hmmmmmm…I seem to recall your comments crossing over into ‘vulgarity’ at times, Jo-WAnne. I’d also like to know if you consider ‘degrading’ others comments by picking on their spelling and grammar, telling them they are “uneducated” and how much more “intelligent” and wiser you are compared to them, a “wrong”? Oh, and then of course, not name names but just run around it by saying things like “I enjoy reading an intelligent response…particularly in light of above drivel…”
NO! That would never be “wrong” now would it, Jo-WAnne? Nah! It’s only “wrong” when it comes from a name that’s in your ‘black book’!!
Actually…the above behaviour from Jo-WAnne would be considered BULLYING, would it not? Hmmmm???
I do believe it would be considered bullying, Nancy!