1. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    11 Aug '14 08:08
    Originally posted by Eladar
    It seems that you have no problem when you talk out your ass, but I guess that just goes to prove your hypocrisy.
    this is the point where i should get defensive and prove i always substantiate my arguments when in fact that burden is on you who made the accusation?

    no thanks.

    like i said, we know you are a moron, your opinions don't matter and you are not entitled to them.
  2. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    11 Aug '14 16:00
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    this is the point where i should get defensive and prove i always substantiate my arguments when in fact that burden is on you who made the accusation?

    no thanks.

    like i said, we know you are a moron, your opinions don't matter and you are not entitled to them.
    You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?
  3. Standard memberfinnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    Joined
    25 Jun '06
    Moves
    64930
    11 Aug '14 20:24
    Originally posted by Eladar
    You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?
    You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?
    So the real test of merit is not what Zahlanzi argues, and not the quality of his sources, but only what Eladar believes. An argument that fails to convince Eladar is not a good enough argument after all.

    There is no room in this scenario for Eladar ever to be wrong. He is the arbiter and judge and jury and authority on which we must rest all decisions.
  4. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    78045
    11 Aug '14 20:261 edit
    Originally posted by finnegan
    You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?
    So the real test of merit is not what Zahlanzi argues, and not the quality of his sources, but only what Eladar believes. An argument that fails to convince Eladar is not a good enough argument after all.

    There is no room in this scenario for Eladar ev ...[text shortened]... wrong. He is the arbiter and judge and jury and authority on which we must rest all decisions.
    "...and not the quality of his sources"

    Guffaw, it was an opinion piece on opinions.
  5. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    11 Aug '14 20:36
    Originally posted by finnegan
    You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?
    So the real test of merit is not what Zahlanzi argues, and not the quality of his sources, but only what Eladar believes. An argument that fails to convince Eladar is not a good enough argument after all.

    There is no room in this scenario for Eladar ev ...[text shortened]... wrong. He is the arbiter and judge and jury and authority on which we must rest all decisions.
    The quality of anyone's source is what the other person believes. Only a hypocrite would believe otherwise.
  6. Standard memberfinnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    Joined
    25 Jun '06
    Moves
    64930
    11 Aug '14 22:47
    Originally posted by Eladar
    The quality of anyone's source is what the other person believes. Only a hypocrite would believe otherwise.
    Nonsense. My children have always believed I know everything.
  7. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    12 Aug '14 07:50
    Originally posted by Eladar
    The quality of anyone's source is what the other person believes. Only a hypocrite would believe otherwise.
    what? that doesn't even make sense
  8. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    78045
    12 Aug '14 09:17
    I can see the appeal of the article to the closet control freaks and not so closeted control freaks, aside from the issue of a public broadcaster futility struggling to be neutral, the other aspect is that Stokes is the chief censor in his classroom. This is what has tickled the fancy of zahlanzi and Finnegan, they got all glassy eyed with dreams of wielding that power.
  9. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    12 Aug '14 14:44
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    I can see the appeal of the article to the closet control freaks and not so closeted control freaks, aside from the issue of a public broadcaster futility struggling to be neutral, the other aspect is that Stokes is the chief censor in his classroom. This is what has tickled the fancy of zahlanzi and Finnegan, they got all glassy eyed with dreams of wielding that power.
    i know you are a big fan of idiots opening their mouths to voice their opinions without thinking.
  10. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    12 Aug '14 15:08
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    what? that doesn't even make sense
    When it does make sense, then you will have opened your eyes to the truth of the matter. Until then you are blind and there is no hope for you.
  11. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    78045
    12 Aug '14 18:22
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    i know you are a big fan of idiots opening their mouths to voice their opinions without thinking.
    Obviously, I'm on a thread that you started.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree