....lybob Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Let me guess...the UN thinks the answer is more government regulation and control, which naturally requires vast numbers of additional people working for governments (and absurdly wasteful and useless government funded entities like the UN) which creates even more drain on the dwindling number of people who still actually produce something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted December 4, 2010 Author Share Posted December 4, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 If banks are running the US then how do you explain this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 (edited) ..llybob, is it possible for you to post your own thoughts? Also, 5 threads started by you on this page that are only youtube links. Paula, Randy, and Simon judge performances. Here we talk. Edited December 5, 2010 by Peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 (edited) ..llybob, is it possible for you to post your own thoughts? Also, 5 threads started by you on this page that are only youtube links. Paula, Randy, and Simon judge performances. Here we talk. Dear Peace I find that many on this board either can't or won't Read. I find endless strawmaning, an abundant of nitpicking on grammar and spelling and that ad hominem attacks are the norm. I'll give an example of a person who can't read. Those articles don't support the statement that she was in Iraq and Pakistan. Even worse one source contradicts her Pakistani involvement. Quote While many have speculated that Plame was involved in monitoring the nuclear proliferation black market, specifically the proliferation activities of Pakistan's nuclear "father," A.Q. Khan, intelligence sources say that her team provided only minimal support in that area, focusing almost entirely on Iran. See this person-X seems to equates minimal to not or no- so I guess he wouldn't be offended by a statement like "Person-X generally has sex with human beings and only engages in minimal sexual activity with live-stock". coming back to this board it's the only place I know of where Sarcasm, comic exaggeration to make a point, word play, and whimsy all have to be clearly labeled and where the least amount of ambiguity in a sentence will be misunderstood in the most ridiculous way possible. Oh (this is me joking) and I suspect many of the finance monkeys are coming to this board during working hours and I hope watching Youtube videos helps to give away the fact that the majority of their time is spent screwing around on the computer instead of working. (now back to serious) These video's are not to change your mind, they are for anyone on this board who like me strongly suspected that there was massive fraud going on in the financial industry but didn't have the education to clearly understand the mechanisms of that fraud. So here's another one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlWhAih5Q8E&feature=related Edited December 5, 2010 by ....lybob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 (edited) So, Billybob (an assumption on my part), you might want to make abundant read abundance in the sentence where you criticize grammar, case, etc. Just trying to be helpful.... Edited December 5, 2010 by Keukasmallies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 I find that many on this board either can't or won't Read. I find endless strawmaning, an abundant of nitpicking on grammar and spelling and that ad hominem attacks are the norm. Yep. That is my exact analysis. The people around here are simpletons and react to everything in a very algorithmic way. I tried to make a flow chart of it once, but didn't finish it. You missed out name-calling, or when you can corner them - denial. I have no memory of anyone on this board (except myself) saying "You were right on this point, I was wrong". To me being able to admit when you are wrong and accept it is one of the greatest signs of intelligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 I'll give an example of a person who can't read. How do you make them thar squiggles into fancy words? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 (edited) No, it's more like Billybob is incapable of an original thought and Conner, well conner is just an idiot. find endless strawmaning, an abundant of nitpicking on grammar and spelling and that ad hominem attacks are the norm. Yet you come back for more. Edited December 5, 2010 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 So, Billybob (an assumption on my part), you might want to make abundant read abundance in the sentence where you criticize grammar, case, etc. Just trying to be helpful.... Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Yep. That is my exact analysis. You can do what you like, but it seems to me a little annoying to have to log in and out of different names just to agree with yourself. Seriously...you can fool some of the people some of the time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Dear Peace I find that many on this board either can't or won't Read. I find endless strawmaning, an abundant of nitpicking on grammar and spelling and that ad hominem attacks are the norm. I'll give an example of a person who can't read. Those articles don't support the statement that she was in Iraq and Pakistan. Even worse one source contradicts her Pakistani involvement. Quote While many have speculated that Plame was involved in monitoring the nuclear proliferation black market, specifically the proliferation activities of Pakistan's nuclear "father," A.Q. Khan, intelligence sources say that her team provided only minimal support in that area, focusing almost entirely on Iran. See this person-X seems to equates minimal to not or no- so I guess he wouldn't be offended by a statement like "Person-X generally has sex with human beings and only engages in minimal sexual activity with live-stock". coming back to this board it's the only place I know of where Sarcasm, comic exaggeration to make a point, word play, and whimsy all have to be clearly labeled and where the least amount of ambiguity in a sentence will be misunderstood in the most ridiculous way possible. Oh (this is me joking) and I suspect many of the finance monkeys are coming to this board during working hours and I hope watching Youtube videos helps to give away the fact that the majority of their time is spent screwing around on the computer instead of working. (now back to serious) These video's are not to change your mind, they are for anyone on this board who like me strongly suspected that there was massive fraud going on in the financial industry but didn't have the education to clearly understand the mechanisms of that fraud. So here's another one. youtube.com/watch?v=VlWhAih5Q8E&feature=related When asked to show that Plame was in Iraq and Pakistan, you provided 3 links, none of which show her to be in Iraq or Pakistan. Thus, while you wasted a lot of time writing out words for a change, it doesn't change the fact that you were wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 (edited) You can do what you like, but it seems to me a little annoying to have to log in and out of different names just to agree with yourself. Seriously...you can fool some of the people some of the time... Yes, the "you are the same person" statement that you folks use also belongs on any flow chart defining your standardized responses. I think I've been accused of being the same person as just about every dem/progressive/liberal who's ever posted here. Edited December 6, 2010 by conner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 I think I've been accused of being the same person as just about every dem/progressive/liberal who's ever posted here. You have never been accused of being the same person as just about every dem/progressive/liberal who's ever posted here. You have however been accused of being an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 You have never been accused of being the same person as just about every dem/progressive/liberal who's ever posted here. You have however been accused of being an idiot. Meh the partisan hack essentially accused him of it. Mind you, if I was one of those guys I would be pissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 Meh the partisan hack essentially accused him of it. Mind you, if I was one of those guys I would be pissed. Which partisan hack? I get confused around here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts