Are you leaving so soon? Why you’ve only just arrived! Maybe next time …
I strenuously deny my head is the least bit attractive. I demand the cites that’ve led you to this ludicrous opinion.
Is it just me, or does this look more like “Do not feed the cat”?
I thought it was a man with elephantitis of the nuts throwing a canteloupe at a broken saw-horse.
Or maybe it’s just me.
Patient taking the Rorschach test:
Doc: What do you see?
Patient: Two people screwing
Doc: and this one?
Patient: A guy masturbating
Doc: try another one
Patient: A woman giving a blowjob
Doc: you seem to be obsessed with sex
Patient: Me?! You are the one showing me the dirty pics!
Jeez, you sound like a dick. No one’s impressed with your prose. If you want to have a discussion, speak English. Seriously.
He does that a lot, doesn’t he? I wish I could live in my own little world where the only legitimate source for anything is myself.
See also: more fun pitting F-P, wherein we decide that he is not a troll, just a moron.
OK, try this:
Some can’t follow logical rules,
They just weren’t blessed with the tools,
It’s a sad part of life,
But there’s bound to be strife,
When contending with these sorts of fools.
I have to admit that I only skimmed the thread linked in this OP (my first thought when it originally popped up was ‘gods…ANOTHER freaking torture thread!’), but it seemed that, while the subject was controversial the OP was fairly well written and generally rant free. The only thing I remember specifically that seemed odd was (IIRC) a sort of side discussion about witchcraft.
What, specifically, was the problem? What were the lies mentioned in this OP? What were the instances of trolling? I don’t want to slog through yet another torture thread…could someone give some details? They were sadly lacking in this OP.
-XT
The OP wasn’t too terribly bad. It was the rest of the thread that was the problem. Among other things, he invented reasons to invalidate the reams of evidence that people presented saying that torture really doesn’t work very well at all for the purposes of getting information. Then he insisted that we accept the accounts of sociopaths as gospel truth.
Ah…well, I didn’t get that far into it. I didn’t want to get involved in yet another torture thread…especially since in the last thread I participated in on this subject I ended up playing devils advocate even though personally I find torture distasteful in the extreme.
Anyway, carry on…sorry to interrupt.
-XT
Actually if you’re looking for an example of lies, you need look no further than Captain Carrot’s most recent post.
Not only did I not insist that anyone accept the opinion of sociopaths or anyone else, but I noted in the OP that I thought it was a matter of opinion with no conclusive proof on either side, and repeatedly made clear that I did not think the evidence was conclusive (in response to others whose integrity and/or reading comprehension was on par with Captain Carrot’s).
Re the “invented reasons”, if you have a problem with that, then you have a problem with the OP, since I noted these reasons there.
Essentially I made various points in the OP which many people consistently ignored and pretended that they were bringing something new to the table when their arguments and cites had already been addressed.
That would be the second time that I know of, someone has questioned the sig. The first time someone said they thought trolls were bipedal. So I had to dig up some video game pictures of mostly quadripedal trolls.
Shall I link you to the thread? 
Does anyone else know of a better way to draw a troll that fits in the four lines alotted for the signature?
The message it conveys still applies though damn it!
Interestingly, the quadripedal-vs.-bipedal troll discussion happened in the other (or, probably more accurately, another) F-P pitting.
Coincidence?!
**Covered_In_Bees!, **personally I was partial to every time I got to call Fotheringay a fucking retard.
Well, not that I’m defending the subject of the pitting, but the only person in this thread who’s posting has failed to impress me is the person who started the thread. If that’s the sum total of his/her ability to reason, or expostulate, I’m not surprised that he/she was frustrated by the linked thread, which involved a fair amount of rational thought processes.
As for the prose of the pitted person, there’s nothing particularly ornate about his vocabulary. If the post complained of by Onomatopoeia is beyond comprehension, may I suggest you go back to high school and acquire some added understanding of the English language? :dubious:
Now me, I can ponitificate with the best of them in the most abstruse fashion. But, then, I’ve been an attorney.
It’s not. I was simply exasperated at FP for trying to rewrite what can’t be edited. Oh, and I’m a guy.
DS, you pulled this over in my F-P pit, too, and then (shock!) failed to respond when I did your homework for you. Get a new song–you’re the fratboy who just played “Livin’ on a Prayer” on the jukebox for the 50th time tonight.
First of all, the two aren’t linked, I’ve not even said the same thing in the two threads. Not that I’d expect you to figure that out. 
Second of all, I didn’t respond to your laundry list of things said in the other post because it wasn’t responsive to what I had said, though it was at least an attempt to make clear what you were unhappy about. But that’s ok, because the general tenor of your posts makes it quite clear who does the cogent thinking, and who just gets exasperated and upset because others don’t want to agree.