Forgot to point out that yes, Slacker, you either lied about me or mischaracterized something I said. Which is it, and why are you dodging admitting it? No big deal to make such a small mistake. I’ve seen EE admit he’s wrong before, I can’t recall seeing you do it.
Not by my reading. You quoted EE but then used your own words to say what he said, rather than refuting his specific assertions, and he’s saying your characterization is incorrect.
And you lied about me or mischaracterized me but you’re either too egotistical or too cowardly to admit it.
Congrats, Andy: you sound like Sarah Huckabee-Sanders, or Rudy Giuliani. Or maybe the big man himself. “The failing SlackerInc makes up all these lies and calls them ‘math’ and ‘logic’.” :smack:
All I’m doing is not understanding your explanations of why EE is wrong, and challenging you for either lying or misstating something I said. I haven’t made any assertions aside from that I don’t get what you’re saying (and why) about EE, and that you said something incorrect about me. I never said you lied about anything (or were incorrect) aside from what you specifically said about me.
This seems to be very difficult for you, but it doesn’t have to be.
Nope, you are explicitly condoning racism. No shoe walking required. Your livelihood is not at stake, your life is not at stake. You are freely expressing your approval of racism in a forum where there are no real consequences either way.
The thread itself sucks, but there’s some gems of posts hidden in there. Check out thisone, where SlackerInc goes on at cringe-inducing length about why you shouldn’t use analogies with cows and dogs. Actual quote: “Cows require much more food than dogs (not to mention a different kind of food)…”
The whole thing could be re-written as an episode of Fawlty Towers.
My personal favorite (for obvious reasons) is thisone. It involves **SlackerInc **expressing wonderment that if you start out with unequal funding and you give everyone a fixed amount of money, you still have unequal funding: “why were you carrying on in your massively innumerate and incoherent attempt at presenting a logical proposition that “special ed black schoolchildren must receive less per capita funding than special ed white schoolchildren”? You were violating our supposed agreement, before belatedly going into high dudgeon mode because I violated it?”
It’s my favorite because it involves **SlackerInc **making a hilariously stupid math error, in a post claiming that someone else made a math error. And it’s the same math error he’s been making since April, proving that he hasn’t learned a single thing.
Errors happen. But when you keep insisting you were correct then you are either trying to rewrite history to make yourself right or you actually think you were right. either way, you have no credibility and can be safely ignored.
A dozen responses from a dozen different people supporting your bad logic? Really?
Cite please. Heck I don’'t even need 12 cites from 12 different people. Lets start with 6 posts from 6 different people. (not cites calling me an idiot because that’s just personal insult by people who can’t come up with an argument, cites that say your logic was right).
I think that he has no real credibility with the more intelligent liberals on this board. He hasn’t has an original thought in the entire time he has been on this board, at least none that I have seen. He is one of those sub-par liberals that only survive on this board because of its insanely leftist slant.
He occasionally uncovers reasonably relevant cites but he is not what I would call a thinker. He is not among the 20 or so far left liberals on this board who make compelling arguments for their position. He is among the mass of hangers on who parrot the comments of their betters.
I probably wouldn’t even remember him distinctly from the rest of the weak liberals on this board except that is handle is such a shocking juxtaposition to his intellect that it was notable.
You made that same exact mistake repeatedly. You’re telling me your phone autocorrects “no one” to “none”? I don’t think so.
I think the only error is in your understanding of what was said. You do understand that you provided the exact same numerical example that I did, while claiming it disproved me?
Why don’t you try going back to my original post and tell me what you think it says (with cites), and I will tell you the specific piece that you have misunderstood.
Remember these words, buddy.
That’s not what I said, dumbass.
I said (paraphrasing): “you frequently misunderstand what people are saying in your conversations with them”. I did not say what you claim I said.
It’s kinda funny that you misunderstood my post about how you repeatedly misunderstand people’s posts.
Remember that statement you made (above) about how errors happen? YEah, that’s happening with you now.
IMHO it is enough to point out that the math seems to work for both, but in the case of the slacker it looks more like demonstrating that god exists thanks to modal logic. Of course Gödel never explained what specific god he demonstrated, so it was less impressive than he thought.
Likewise, the Slacker (and Damuri Ajashi) truly does think that inputting those numbers demonstrates something about how funding for minorities among schools in specific districts works (Special Ed kids were not the only ones talked about in the overall discussion); on that he can be right based on the numbers he inputted, but he does lie by omission overall by disregarding factors like how federal funds are not as big as he implied and it is when local money is considered (that is, the lion share of how much money students get) that shows what others studies have found:
Again, it was a half truth at best to use math to claim that minority students had almost the same funding (Special ed kids were not the only ones discussed). As pointed, that is close to the truth when comparing same educational districts, but it is a misleading statement that ignored the big picture. It was clear that the Slacker wanted earlier to claim that minorities or the poor were getting basically the same funding. Hence he was wrong, and also by insisting that federal funding was missing from the studies, that complain implied that the missing federal funding was enough to support his overall point. It was not.
As it turns out, federal funding by its nature is less discriminatory when supporting students. But it is not the main funding source, again: state and local funding has the lion’s share.
So in the big picture the Slacker was indeed wrong. In the USA there are many districts that are short-changing large percentages of low-income and minority students.
And Charles Murray and their ilk are not only racists, but willful ignorants by ignoring dollar amounts that do not support their solutions. Now those are the white people one should hate.