This gentle reader would like to say that the above link to Shayna’s post, took me to the best documented cite I can recall ever having seen. I haven’t read the entire thread, but I what I learned from that single post has eliminated much of my own ignorance regarding this topic. Nicely done. Thank you Shayna.
Well, certainly - I mean, he won’t even accept the APA as an authority on phsychological issues, so why on earth would he accept anything on the web? :rolleyes:
Actually, he gets it, throws it away, tells us it’s not a real cite, and twists what was previously said to suit his own views. Then he spends four pages arguing the definition of the words “internet,” “is,” “I,” and the period at the end of this sentence.
I am so glad I’m not the only one who sees this jackass doing this.
Esprix
[sub]Scylla[/sub]
I find it amusing to the point of absurdity that The Ryan is complaining about the quality of cites in threads he participates in when one of those in question goes on for three full pages before we see a single fucking cite from him, and when we do it’s regarding the meaning of “homosexual conduct” from the DoD.
Ryan, by your own definition of “cite”, you STILL HAVEN’T PROVIDED ONE.
Feh! His post isn’t even regarding the meaning of “homosexual conduct,” because that would actually be relevant to the discussion. No, all he was purporting to prove was that other people use the term, “homosexual conduct.”
Well, duh! We never said the term didn’t exist. Obviously, it does. What we said, over and over and over and OVER – AND provided cite after cite and quote after quote supporting – is that it’s inappropriate to use that terminology for male-male child molestation. His cites use the term to describe male-male adult consentual conduct, which is exactly what we told him is an appropriate usage.
He STILL doesn’t get it. And I’m afraid he never will, so long as his only goal is not to be “wrong.”
Algernon, thank you very much for your kind words. That’s one of the nicest things anyone’s ever said to me. It makes all the aggravation at dealing with The Moron worth the trouble. Thanks! 
I believe that the thread linked to above makes my opinion on the poster in question unambiguously clear. My only regret is that I cannot in good conscience start a petition drive to have the mods replace his “member” tag with P.L.F..
scylla, I believe we now have at least one safe topic of discussion in case we ever do find ourselves sharing a beer.
: sniff ::
can’t ya just feel the love
Kuuuummmbaaaayaaaaaaa …
**
I tried, but I cannot find a cite in which TheRyan claims to be sane. Just call me Squealin’ Neddy.
So, just what statement of mine is proven wrong by that cite? How the hell am I supposed to argue with someone when they won’t even tell me which of my statements they think they’ve disproven?
SuaSponte:
I said that I consider being proven wrong to be losing. I didn’t say that I consider it to be bad. And is there anyone who doesn’t prefer being right to being wrong?
wring:
Cite?
Scylla
I take it I’m the only one that sees the irony in that statement?
iamapunha:
I haven’t provided a cite that fulfills my requirements for proving someone wrong. You simply asked for a cite. Any cite at all. So I gave you one. Now you’e complaining that it doesn’t prove anyone wrong. Well, YOU DIDN’T ASK FOR SUCH A CITE. So quit whining. And BTW, I don’t recall anyone asking for a cite of any of my statements. Care to remind me?
MEBuckner:
I think that this is a misuse of your moderator powers which makes a mockery of the whole concept of the Pit vs. Great Debates. People wanted to make personal attacks at me, but they couldn’t because it was in GD, so you simply moved it to the Pit. What’s the point of not allowing personal attacks in GD if that rule can simply be sidestepped by cooperative mods? If I had wanted this to be a complaint, I would have put it in the Pit to begin with, and I probably would have included specific names of how I was complaining about. Do you think you know better than I where I want my threads?
So, just what statement of mine is proven wrong by that cite? How the hell am I supposed to argue with someone when they won’t even tell me which of my statements they think they’ve disproven?
SuaSponte:
I said that I consider being proven wrong to be losing. I didn’t say that I consider it to be bad. And is there anyone who doesn’t prefer being right to being wrong?
wring:
Cite?
Scylla
I take it I’m the only one that sees the irony in that statement?
iamapunha:
I haven’t provided a cite that fulfills my requirements for proving someone wrong. You simply asked for a cite. Any cite at all. So I gave you one. Now you’e complaining that it doesn’t prove anyone wrong. Well, YOU DIDN’T ASK FOR SUCH A CITE. So quit whining. And BTW, I don’t recall anyone asking for a cite of any of my statements. Care to remind me?
MEBuckner:
I think that this is a misuse of your moderator powers which makes a mockery of the whole concept of the Pit vs. Great Debates. People wanted to make personal attacks at me, but they couldn’t because it was in GD, so you simply moved it to the Pit. What’s the point of not allowing personal attacks in GD if that rule can simply be sidestepped by cooperative mods? If I had wanted this to be a complaint, I would have put it in the Pit to begin with, and I probably would have included specific names of how I was complaining about. Do you think you know better than I where I want my threads?
BTW, after the first post, my browser claimed that it hadn’t gone through.
Cite?
OK, OK, cheap shot. I know. 
The Ryan:
Indubitably, ya meathead
and the term you’re looking for isn’t “irony” it’s “poetic justice.”
And there’s a handy little test I recommend.
If you are the only one that gets it, and everybody else is blind, crazy and stupid,
guess what?
Can the Ryan please provide a cite that proves that a site is not a cite?
Kirk
here (responding to this remark of mine): A homosexual is defined as some one who is sexually attracted to sexually mature persons of the same gender.
Oddly enough, when I made this comment in this thread, I was going for a generic reference (hence dictionary.com) to the concept that you’d insist on a dictionary definition of a term being used to describe a set of human behaviors, vs. the more technically accurate ones used by the rest of us (ie the ‘Psychiatrists’ reference). I find it ironic that when I actually found the specific quote I was referring to, it was indeed ‘dictionary.com’ that you referenced.
Retraction?
I note that in your new thread you do seem to have ceased insisting that male on male molestation has to be committed by homosexuals since it’s a same gender act. and it only took 4 pages…
Ryan-
We really don’t care where you want your threads. You can want this thread in GD, you can want it in ATMB, you can want it to go whereever. Your wants regarding the placement of your thread are meaningless.
Your OP was a complaint, maybe a rant, though possibly closer to a whine. It was not the start of a debate. If you wanted this in GD, you should have started a debate over what qualifies as a cite. Instead, you chose to rail against those who do not provide you with proper cites. Ergo, it goes in the Pit.
And as far as your insinuation regarding MEBuckner’s motives- if you truly feel that he moved this thread for the sole purpose of allowing you to be insulted, perhaps you’d find things more to your liking at another message board. I certainly wouldn’t stay in a place that gave me egotistical paranoid delusions.
Gawdammit, John, that’s another beer I want to buy you.
Of course not, The Ryan. But it’s a sign of maturity to be able to accept when one is wrong, and learn from it. Or did you miss that whole “Fighting Ignorance” thing?
Get up, boy. I bet you can squeal. I bet you can squeal like a beagle.
Don Fenris
Looks like we got us a sow here, 'stead of a boar.