|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Jul 31, 2023 21:13:05 GMT
I saw it the first time, genius. Without an idiot troll calling people "vatnic," there would be no inspiration for that OP, now would there? Hope that helps. If it walks like a vatnik, looks like a vatnik, and talks like a vatnik, it’s probably a vatnik. A coat cannot walk and talk. All it can do is look like a coat, Molly Moron. If you all want to keep on showing us how I am smart and you are dumb, you just go on right ahead. |
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 31, 2023 21:33:24 GMT
And yet, here you are kicking off a thread that will inevitably breed argument. Since when are you the board monitor? I never claimed to be. I was merely responding to the assertion that he wasn't interested in an argument. |
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 31, 2023 21:34:56 GMT
You might want to take a second look at the user name on the OP.... I saw it the first time, genius. Without an idiot troll calling people "vatnic," there would be no inspiration for that OP, now would there? Hope that helps. Not really, since thst doesn't explain why the OP started an argumentative thread when he wasn't interested in an argument. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 31, 2023 21:37:55 GMT
I saw it the first time, genius. Without an idiot troll calling people "vatnic," there would be no inspiration for that OP, now would there? Hope that helps. Not really, since thst doesn't explain why the OP started an argumentative thread when he wasn't interested in an argument. I never saw it as an argumentative thread. I saw it more as an educational thread. However, some posters will try to make an argumentative thread of it, and some will accuse others of trying to start an argument when they are not. |
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 31, 2023 21:37:55 GMT
And yet, here you are kicking off a thread that will inevitably breed argument. That was not the intention. I am showing how those who use the term of a winter coat is a failed attempt at an insult and they are dumb while I am smarter than they are. It wasn't your intention to perpetuate argument by starting an entirely new thread about an existing argument? Especially when the point, as you just stated, was to claim superior intelligence? Sure little buddy. Sure. |
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 31, 2023 21:38:56 GMT
Not really, since thst doesn't explain why the OP started an argumentative thread when he wasn't interested in an argument. I never saw it as an argumentative thread. I saw it more as an educational thread. However, some posters will try to make an argumentative thread of it, and some will accuse others of trying to start an argument when they are not. The OP just admitted thst he created it in response to an existing argument. Maybe I'm just more perceptive than you. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 31, 2023 21:41:51 GMT
I never saw it as an argumentative thread. I saw it more as an educational thread. However, some posters will try to make an argumentative thread of it, and some will accuse others of trying to start an argument when they are not. The OP just admitted thst he created it in response to an existing argument. Maybe I'm just more perceptive than you. Are you saying a thread in response to an existing argument = an argumentative thread? ![[shrug]](http://storage.proboards.com/6870873/images/GNdzQKpfkkHBBwUPdCiE.gif) |
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 31, 2023 21:46:40 GMT
The OP just admitted thst he created it in response to an existing argument. Maybe I'm just more perceptive than you. Are you saying a thread in response to an existing argument = an argumentative thread? Why would a direct response to an argument NOT be argumentative just because it's a new thread? |
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Jul 31, 2023 21:48:08 GMT
Since when are you the board monitor? I never claimed to be. I was merely responding to the assertion that he wasn't interested in an argument. The thread is in response to being called something by someone in an argument that already started that somehow you can't remember or skipped, coincidentally. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 31, 2023 21:48:37 GMT
Are you saying a thread in response to an existing argument = an argumentative thread? Why would a direct response to an argument NOT be argumentative just because it's a new thread? To clear up the confusion caused by the argument. That was easy. Next question. |
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 31, 2023 21:52:07 GMT
I never claimed to be. I was merely responding to the assertion that he wasn't interested in an argument. The thread is in response to being called something by someone in an argument that already started that somehow you can't remember or skipped, coincidentally. Which...supports my assertion that the whole point of the thread was argument, despite the assertion of the OP. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 31, 2023 21:53:31 GMT
Why would a direct response to an argument NOT be argumentative just because it's a new thread? To clear up the confusion caused by the argument. That was easy. Next question. It was an easy evasion, sure. Anyone else would call the introduction of facts in support of an argument, part of an argument. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 31, 2023 21:59:55 GMT
To clear up the confusion caused by the argument. That was easy. Next question. It was an easy evasion, sure. Anyone else would call the introduction of facts in support of an argument, part of an argument. Nothing evasive about it, dude. ![[no]](http://storage.proboards.com/6870873/images/RccV0uLHhtCBRI0gG0lI.gif) You asked me. I told you. If you don't have any more questions, I'll be on me merry way. |
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 31, 2023 22:00:19 GMT
It was an easy evasion, sure. Anyone else would call the introduction of facts in support of an argument, part of an argument. Nothing evasive about it, dude. You asked me. I told you. If you don't have any more questions, I'll be on me merry way. K bye. |
|
|
|
Post by Nogbad on Aug 1, 2023 7:41:26 GMT
Some vatniks don't know what an idiot really is.
Hint: look in the mirror.
|
|
