Ah so you "misrepresented" your reasons in your reply?
The hypocrisy spreads.
And your initial observation was based on...
In your opinion.
Specify this "bullshit" or shut up.
Banning SAM
- Thread starter CheskiChips
- Start date
- Status
The hypocrisy spreads.
Specify this "bullshit" or shut up.
Oli:
More passive-aggression from the resident brown-noser with a chip on his shoulder.
Honestly, Oli, if you have a bone of contention to pick with me, then just come out and say it. There's no need to be scared, you're safe behind that there monitor of yours.
What hypocrisy? Do you tout unsubstantiated nonsense because you're retarded, dishonest, or a little of both?
Yeah, my bad. I forgot to mention 'hypocritical' and 'stupid' when describing your posturing. Thanks for correcting me.
Well, you strike me as one of those pussies who aggravates individuals from behind the safety of anonymity. But then, I only have your willful dishonesty and blatant stupidity to go on, here. Correct me if my character assessment is erroneous.
More passive-aggression from the resident brown-noser with a chip on his shoulder.
Honestly, Oli, if you have a bone of contention to pick with me, then just come out and say it. There's no need to be scared, you're safe behind that there monitor of yours.
What hypocrisy? Do you tout unsubstantiated nonsense because you're retarded, dishonest, or a little of both?
Yeah, my bad. I forgot to mention 'hypocritical' and 'stupid' when describing your posturing. Thanks for correcting me.
Well, you strike me as one of those pussies who aggravates individuals from behind the safety of anonymity. But then, I only have your willful dishonesty and blatant stupidity to go on, here. Correct me if my character assessment is erroneous.
Oli:
Misrepresenting me again, Oli? Your dishonesty becomes more evident.
Well, pretty much everything you type is bullshit, dear.
But you might want to start with this post of yours:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1981200&postcount=195
Typical passive-aggressive bullshit I've come to expect from the likes of you and a number of the self-righteous retards on this forum.
Misrepresenting me again, Oli? Your dishonesty becomes more evident.
Well, pretty much everything you type is bullshit, dear.
But you might want to start with this post of yours:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1981200&postcount=195
Typical passive-aggressive bullshit I've come to expect from the likes of you and a number of the self-righteous retards on this forum.
Zero evidence for either epithet.
Oh so you can't read either?
You accuse S.A.M. of hypocrisy and misrepresentation and then proceed to do the same yourself, in the same thread...
Bone of contention: only that you are, as stated, a hypocrite with poor reasoning ability.
Your own "misrepresentations" of course. Or feeble attempts to back track on errors.
Anonymity?
Really?
I'm not the one here with a made up name.
Well I was wrong about you.
You're deluded as well as stupid and hypocritical.
Nice try, Oli, but I'm bowing out of this one.
You failed.
You failed.
So....are we banning SAM or what?
I doubt it. As you can see, she has quite a few fanatical supporters who refuse to acknowledge that she is about as dishonest as they come.
at least she is dishonest and smart unlike some people here who are dishonest and stupid
Personally, I think the people bitching for the banning of S.A.M take a note from the rather ... instructive lesson which has taken place here, ergo. the 'discussion' between myself and Oli.
Quite often you will meet people on web forums who will refuse to concede a valid point, who won't budge despite being shown up, who will engage in semantics and nitpicking until the cows come home, and who will do anything they can to rile you up and make you lose control (whether this be evasions, misrepresentations, deflections, or snide insults).
The best thing to do in these circumstances is to just walk away. I made a rule for myself a long time ago that once a discussion has degenerated to a point where I felt a X level of frustration, it is really time to throw in the towel. If you're not enjoying yourself, if nothing is being achieved, then what's the point? Why are you arguing with this individual? Why are you reading their posts? Nobody forces you to. Are you masochistic retard? It's quite obvious when a poster isn't arguing in good faith, but only wishes to piss you off and further their agenda, so why let them goad you?
Oli mentioned that S.A.M was a boon to this forum because she, uhh, tested people's argumentative capabilities. I disagree, although perhaps she is of some benefit in another manner. She tests your self control.
So perhaps instead of being a facist and screaming for S.A.M to be banned when she acts like a prat (which covers about 95% of my interactions with her), you should exercise self-control. At the end of the day, they are just words on a screen. Nobody forces you to read her nonsense, nor does anyone force you to respond.
I do question the admin's judgement on making her a moderator, though. It is necessary that one respects authority figures, and I can't respect S.A.M.
Quite often you will meet people on web forums who will refuse to concede a valid point, who won't budge despite being shown up, who will engage in semantics and nitpicking until the cows come home, and who will do anything they can to rile you up and make you lose control (whether this be evasions, misrepresentations, deflections, or snide insults).
The best thing to do in these circumstances is to just walk away. I made a rule for myself a long time ago that once a discussion has degenerated to a point where I felt a X level of frustration, it is really time to throw in the towel. If you're not enjoying yourself, if nothing is being achieved, then what's the point? Why are you arguing with this individual? Why are you reading their posts? Nobody forces you to. Are you masochistic retard? It's quite obvious when a poster isn't arguing in good faith, but only wishes to piss you off and further their agenda, so why let them goad you?
Oli mentioned that S.A.M was a boon to this forum because she, uhh, tested people's argumentative capabilities. I disagree, although perhaps she is of some benefit in another manner. She tests your self control.
So perhaps instead of being a facist and screaming for S.A.M to be banned when she acts like a prat (which covers about 95% of my interactions with her), you should exercise self-control. At the end of the day, they are just words on a screen. Nobody forces you to read her nonsense, nor does anyone force you to respond.
I do question the admin's judgement on making her a moderator, though. It is necessary that one respects authority figures, and I can't respect S.A.M.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Most of those are just stupid..
- Status