StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Mr. Oragahn wrote:
The topic isn't much of a problem. The problem is that it's you who made the topic.
So you admit that their reasoning is selectively biased?
Just like a court is against someone who's known to be troublesome, genius. You're not a random member with a neutral case anymore.
There's a file about you. Like, you know, some convict condemned multiples times for the same kind of crimes.
Is that hard to grasp? Do you still think anyone here is going to buy that saintitude you're so fond of?
People rarely get banned here. You've been banned here for several weeks in a row, after progressive incremental sanctions. That should make you think and understand a few things if you were honest or smart or both. Obviously you either don't get it, or pretend not getting it. Considering how you are able to construct your arguments, which requires a certain level of intelligence, it's obvious that only the second option applies to you. Which is even worse in fact.
Wow, Mr. O. What's more, you seem to say this casually and fail to understand that this alone validates my argument, does it not?
Your argument is silly, that is all.
Your claim of persecution is just a fallacy. What you fell to is called fair justice.
We know your manners.
I never called somebody a sub-human like you did, Mr. O.
An insult is a small price to pay in light of allowing an active troll on a forum.
I require that if you're allowed to stay and open that putrid sink hole of yours which you call a mouth, I be allowed to flame you as I see fit.
And while that may have been a burst of anger on your part, you still have no basis on which you question my "manners".
Yes I have. That's called a pedigree. Do you see any multi-week long ban on my profile and in the technical forum?
No. So I am morally superior to you here. Get it?
I spent literally over an hour and a half responding to sonofron (forgive my spelling)'s post. I kid you not. I am not "ignoring" anything.
You think that spending your time replying to one post (and as I saw, said reply being of absolutely abyssal drek) is going to be a good enough smoke screen to all your current and past sins?
The other problem is how you behave once the thread is running, so we can see what you really had in mind when making it: accepting proper debate and valid evidence, and paying attention to what your opposition said, or doing nothing of that.
"accepting proper debate and valid evidence" is another way of saying "I don't agree with you, so I'll accuse of of trolling because I don't like you".
It would if we had actually NOT bothered presenting ample amounts of evidence of your trolling, you know.
Your negationism is tiresome and quite unacceptable.
Unless if you can provide examples of me failing to "accept proper debate and valid evidence". I'm not the one who states that all inductive reasoning is invalid.
Did in the past, and obviously it's happening again now. Prae managed to find no less than two or three fresh examples, right in the same thread, if not the same post of yours.
Why this damned place only manages to attract trolls, I don't know. Perhaps because it's just too focused on some dead debate and that the old and hereditary opposition is actually literally incapable and unwilling to challenge us. Yet there doesn't seem to be a loss of interest in said debates on Internet as a whole.
This place deserves more light if anything else.
I wonder if some kind of merging of two small respectable communities with enough similarities, but which would also help diversify the nature of the topics discussed on the new forum, wouldn't help a tad.
