Then why don’t you just SAY WHAT YOU MEAN instead of changing the rules to suit yourself?
If you don’t give a shit what politicians think or say, then you’re just plain stupid.
Plus, I thought you said:
We’ll see Diogenes again, I’m sure.
As for me, I’ll be around as long as “The Straight Dope” needs to be revealed.
Or till my computer crashes…
Or until you stop bullshitting people.
Whichever comes first.
If you don’t know people with integrity, and you don’t have it yourself, doesn’t mean we don’t exist. I don’t need to feed my ego, I guess some of you folks need that.
Anyway, your wish has been granted, Marley has entered the fray and will dictate the time and place. Stay tuned.
Guin, I sent you an email on this subject, to your listed address. I asked you to reply, but haven’t heard anything yet.
Are you still curious? I’m not avoiding the issue.
I like to think I have some measure of integrity. However, if I make a claim such as “I did such-and-such” and someone says “yeah, but can you prove it?”, and I can prove it with a cite, link, reference, or whatever, I fail to see how it would be a breach of ethics or an abandonment of my integrity to do so. After all, as the claimant, the burden of proof is on me.
In this case, you made the claim. Guess where the burden of proof lies?
Your demands notwithstanding, I will not betray Marley23. It is his opportunity now to drop it or pursue it.
I don’t have anything to prove to anyone. I make a statement and you can accept it or reject it. Don’t mean nuthin’ to me. Now, Marley23, a direct involvee, want to challenge my statement, that’s different. To him I’ll respond. But I’m not here to satisfy curiosity seekers, and I’m under no obligation to prove anything to “the audience.”
If you cn’t wait for what I consider a “fair venue” between marley and me, too bad. Make of it what you will; I play fair. I guess you don’t?
S¬
Wow, you got 10 minutes? That much? It’s not just Dio who does it, but the standard way of arguing against the paranormal here is to whine about cites. Then when you give them, they take one look at the website itself, call the whole site crap, thereby conveniently and quickly invalidating any cite you could ever provide.
Gee, you stay up late, too? hawaii to japan, I guess it’s midday for you…
Yeah, I’m getting kinda fed up with that kind of dishonest BS. I mean, this is supposed to be a website “Fighting Ignorance,” right? No wonder it’s taking longer than expected…
P.S. I think the 10 minutes was how long it took to compose the reply. There’s no evidence that he read more than one title, and his answers usually skip all the important parts in a post. It’s like “grab something to refute, hurry and post ASAP, and ‘storm the gates.’” Winning, and supporting egoes has become more important than finding truth.
It’s sad.
Anyway, good night. Be well.
“…And around the last turn, it’s Full O’Shit, then ButtMunchkin, trailed by Peckerhead…they’re coming into the stretch, and it’s Full O’Shit by a length…”
I’m so sick of this crap about not wanting to “betray” another poster, that I’ll post the link. I ASSume you’re talking about this thread: Is Kerry “out of the mainstream”? There was no real “argument” that I could see – just some petty squabbling.
“Betray” me? Sheesh, I even posted links to that thread in the recent Pitting of Snakespirit. This is a public message board, there’s no secret material.
As JeffB notes, the discussion Snakespirit and I had was tangential to the thread. So even if he’s right, he hardly won the argument.
I was annoyed by his laziness and his contention that Washington Times is more trustworthy and/or mainstream than Salon.com. Why is the Washington Times, owned by a radical right “Reverend” with Messianic delusions, more trustworthy than Salon? Because Salon.com wanted him to watch an ad before reading their article. The horror! :eek:
From the thread:
minty green then linked to a Salon piece that talked about what an insane crazyman Rev. Moon is (specifically it was about a ceremony where he was crowned in front of some Congresspeople and talked about how he’d redeemed the souls of Hitler and Stalin, who had called him “humanity’s Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent.” ). Did Snakespirit read it? Eventually. But not before complaining:
So that was my complaint. He was too lazy or afraid of cookies to read the story, and actually tried to use that as an argument against the source and the people making it. Add in a few points for being clueless enough to cite the Washington freaking Times. And Snake, this is a Pit thread you started, which often leads to the OP being attacked. I don’t give a crap if you think this is a hijack.
That’s it Marley 23? That’s the thread where Snakespirit had you running like a scalded dog? I’m thinking I can pretty much go undefeated 'round here. Who could possibly top this rejoinder “Oh Yeah? Says You!!”?
I suppose he’ll argue that I misrepresented him, but that’s definitely the right thread. Maybe I should’ve quoted my own posts because you’d have seen that I’m wrong. Read the thread. If that doesn’t prove Snakespirit’s right, the fact that he resorted to the clever “ass” trick (on two different posters!) MUST prove he won the argument.
By the way, rjung, that post was hilarious.
All right, I retract my earlier analogy. That’s what I get for skimming a thread while dripping on the carpet from six rounds with a lawn full of runaway sprinklers.
Eh, stick Brutus in there, then. He definitely qualifies as a drunk bum. 
At least he doesn’t get into fights with lawn sprinklers.
Your funeral, dude.
If I ignored a news piece because of who owned the paper I’d never read the newspaper. The news piece was even reported in other papers, though in a less vehement form.
Last time I reconfigured my computer to access an “elite” website I got a virus that crashed my computer. I’m not risking my new computer to please you or anyone else. No, I’m not very computer literate.
Yeah, I’m flippant. So are 90% of the rest of the people here, yourself included.
There you go making assumptions again.
I never contended that the Washington Times was more trustworthy. I compared Salon.com (you contend that it is mainstream? An unbiased source of news?) to the National Enquirer because the technique was similar:
So it bothers you that I’m lazy. That’s why you have used every opportunity to harASS (you use that against me all the time, I did it to you, what once? twice? maybe three times?) me with this one item.
It’s like your crusade. Rail against the evil Snakespirit! Gee, he even has Snake in his name, he must be evil! We will toss the word ASS back at him at every opportunity.
If you won that “squabble,” then why are you still so pissed off about it? I’m not. I don’t keep harassing you. In fact I even went so far as to avoid pointing out the item to the merely curious. Maybe in your opinion you won. But you are not acting like it. You are acting like a loser.
Hey, stop harassing me and the whole thing will go away. Since you have proven yourself ungrateful, keep harassing me and you’ll have no more consideration from me.
“I fought the lawn, and the lawn won…”
Drag him out and shoot him. I’ll swear out the warrent later.
How does linking to a post on a public message board constitute betrayal?
If I link to one of your posts, will you inform me that ‘You have betrayed me. I demand satisfaction.’ and slap me with a glove?
For the record, Snake, Salon is a great left-wing Internet mag. I’m a premium subscriber!
Gee, our left-wing paper here in Honolulu is FREE! Both on the internet and at the newsstand. And I never miss it! (It carries The Straight Dope, you see.)
I guess I’m just spoiled. 