Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've argued with this guy in the Halo thread for a bit. He makes valid points now and then, but the fact that he throws in 5% of validity mixed with 95% of personal attacks makes even his 5% validity seem like stupidity.

Argued? You mean got your ass handed to you because you were lying? Yeah I remember that. Now go back to posting one liners.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Argued? You mean got your ass handed to you because you were lying? Yeah I remember that. Now go back to posting one liners.

Do a search on my posts, dear.

 

As for lying, refer to the Halo thread in Games discussion.

 

Find me ONE proof of any sort of lie in my posts and I'll concede.

Word economics

To express my vast wisdom

I speak in haiku's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
People like him are impossible to win against because they'll say the same things over and over again and never admit even if they loose.

If I lose, all you have to do is stop replying. You can't do that here though, because you haven't won. Am I an ass hole? Sure, but at least I am RIGHT, so there is a method to my madness.

 

Besides, the stork thing wasn't THAT bad. I throw that stuff in there because I think that even the most brilliant of posts is still crap if it's boring. If people are going to read my posts, I should at least make it worthwhile for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Besides, the stork thing wasn't THAT bad.

Yeah it wasn't bad. In fact, most of your insults ARE quite witty. But there's a line between being witty and meaning personal injury, and I suggest you explore the width of that line and use wit as it should be used: sustaining interest.

 

When I read your posts I don't get the sense of an intelligent and interesting character that I'm sure you are in life, but instead I get the image of this arrogant and quite snobby guy who thinks he's the king of the world because his opinions are always right.

 

There are many excellent debators here that aren't afraid to use wit as part of their arsenal (see Volourn, Karzak, Hades_one) but when I debate with them, their witty insults lighten my heart and make me chuckle now and then. Yours are just caustic remarks which gives me and others that debate with you the wrong impression.

Word economics

To express my vast wisdom

I speak in haiku's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy reminds me of O'reilly or however you spell his name. Anyone here seen Outfoxed? I know 'Jn's going to call it all lies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If he does he proves my point.

 

 

 

BTW, the stork thing was kinda stupid and irrelevant. Talking about someone's parents is both unneccessary and a line that you don't cross. And it makes me try to resist the urge to point out my parents could shoot this down, as that would turn into a my father can beat up yours or something equally pointless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I do. If you don't like it, don't reply. Most people don't. There are people out there far more crude and insulting than I am. If you don't think I'm intelligent, that's fine, it'll just be even funnier when I win.

 

My opinions aren't always right. I just tend to stick to arguing about the ones I know I can back up. That's how you do it. You strike at the right moment, and keep your mouth shut the rest of the time. Don't complain if I burn you a little in the process. Life is rarely kind, the same goes for reality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This guy reminds me of O'reilly or however you spell his name.  Anyone here seen Outfoxed?

 

O'Reilly is a moron. Give me a TV show, put him on as a guest for about thirty seconds and we'll see who needs the spin "doctor". He's almost as bad as that Maddox retard.

 

BTW, the stork thing was kinda stupid and irrelevant.  Talking about someone's parents is both unneccessary and a line that you don't cross.  And it makes me try to resist the urge to point out my parents could shoot this down, as that would turn into a my father can beat up yours or something equally pointless.

 

The funny thing is, if we did this long enough, you would end up flaming just as ferociously as me or anyone else. People love to pretend that they are superior to others because they are more courteous and have more self "control". EVERYONE has their breaking point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"He exaggerates but doesn't outright lie."

 

No, in fact, he does flat out lie. Micheal Moore is a liar. An entertaining liar; but a lair nontheless. Don't be part of the cover up!

DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He does lie, as Volourn said. The following is a minor issue, which may make it worse. Apparently, Moore said that he became disillusioned with America when a half-dozen of his high school classmates were killed in Vietnam. After a smidgen of Googling, James Lileks discovered that these people were actually adults, didn't go to school with Moore, and weren't even from the same town (they were from Flint, while Moore grew up in one of the city's suburbs).

 

So, Moore lies through his teeth in order to prove a point. It's beyond me why people are willing to champion someone who deliberately (and needlessly) falsifies the truth. Even if (actually, especially if) you agree with his general conclusions, there is absolutely no excuse for giving him the time of day.

 

EDIT: before I get called on it, I'd better apologize for a mistake in the first paragraph. The casualties were, like Moore, from Davison, not Flint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He does lie, as Volourn said. The following is a minor issue, which may make it worse. Apparently, Moore said that he became disillusioned with America when a half-dozen of his high school classmates were killed in Vietnam. After a smidgen of Googling, James Lileks discovered that these people were actually adults, didn't go to school with Moore, and weren't even from the same town (they were from Flint, while Moore grew up in one of the city's suburbs).

 

So, Moore lies through his teeth in order to prove a point. It's beyond me why people are willing to champion someone who deliberately (and needlessly) falsifies the truth. Even if (actually, especially if) you agree with his general conclusions, there is absolutely no excuse for giving him the time of day.

Give me a link. Did he specify who they were? If not how did you track them down?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shin: my apologies for being misleading. I didn't do the fact checking myself, but was relying on a bleat James Lileks wrote a week or two ago (and which is quite convincing). I don't know how to do links, but you can find the essay at:

 

lileks.com/bleats/archive/04/0704/070804.html

 

And, if you're not familiar with Lileks, I strongly recommend that you take a couple of hours to browse his site, particularly the Institute of Official Cheer...wonderfully funny stuff there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...