Uh, no. But thanks for playing.
I think you mean “douche.” Or “touchy.”
But he’s a poet, and a script writer. Of course he could not have possibly misspelled a word.
Surely he’s just invented his very own personal philosophy.
Maybe it’s the British spelling. I seem to recall him mentioning his country of origin once or twice.
“I have a career as a poet and a scriptwriter,” is a slightly less pathetic way of saying, “I don’t have a career.”
Again, if we interpreted the rules of the board to your standard, you would be the first person banned from it. Because you are, on a pretty fundamental level, a dishonest hack. By which I mean, you not only lie, but you lie badly. You evasions are obvious, and your distortions painful. And your insults, worst of all, pathetically bland. There’s a lot of assholes on this board who, at least, know how to bust out the good slams when they’re backed into a corner. Getting insulted by you is like being gummed by an arthritic pug. You’re aware that, in a technical sense, you’re being attacked, but the overall effect is just a bit damp and sad.
Riveting!
Not well, I’d imagine.
I’m ignorant about ignorance? Christ, I wish, but I’ve had too much experience with folks such as yourself to claim that bliss. But yes, I, too, have read the back of a Marshall McLuhan book, and understand that communication is about both the sender and the receiver. Which is why I’m so comfortable in pointing out that you are really bad at it, because when you say something, and people respond to it, you insist that they’re misinterpreting you. And when you respond to other people, you miss the point they’re making by distances that can only properly be calculated by measuring parrallax. So you fail both as a sender, and a receiver, of information. Probably a lot of other things, too, which explains why you listed “poet” as your career.
Indeed. But I think the posters in that thread did the best they could despite the efforts of you and Linus.
Yes, that’s a truly first rate example of you just not understanding very basic concepts. The idea that one is concerned about anti-woman prejudice does not, in any way, shape, or form, imply that one is okay with anti-male prejudice. That someone actively works to get more women in STEM fields does not imply that they want to keep men out of those fields. And the fact that someone identifies as a feminist does not, to any sane person, carry with it the implication that they are anti-man. These are fundamental failures, on your part, in understanding some of the most basic principles in decoding language. These are things you should have figured out as a young child. That you continue to make these sorts of literally elementary errors in reading is very telling.
I’m familiar with the concept, thanks. There’s this other thing we do in the US, that I understand is popular in Britain as well these days. It’s called “Capitalizing proper nouns.” “British” and “American” both take capitals. I only point this out to help you with that whole “Jack of Words” thing that you keep failing to live up to.
This is unusually incoherent, even by your standards. Are you trying to say, “An ideology that can only stick its fingers in its ears and insult people is an ideology?” Because that may be the first wholly accurate thing you said since you started posting here. Meaningless, obviously, but still accurate.
I’m sorry, in what way am I using my “power” as a moderator against you? To my memory, I’ve never posted to you as a moderator at all. Everything I’ve said to you has been as a poster. Exactly how have I been using my position to “define your reality?” Or are you just so desperate for an avenue of attack, and so beggared in the imagination department, that all you can muster is this half-assed, adolescent swipe at even the most token and tin-plated authority? Why not just call me a crypto-fascist, and take home the Triple Crown of Sullen Teenage Rebellion?
No, wait, I see that I’m wrong, aren’t I? I did post a mod note to you earlier in this thread because you used a racial slur. And then tried to claim that I’d misunderstood the context because I’m a dumb American.
Which is, sadly, rather typical of you, isn’t it? You just tried to imply, earlier in your last post, that Americans are prejudiced against you because you’re foreign. But in every exchange I’ve seen between you and other members of the board, the only person to bring up nationality in a disparaging manner… is you. Likewise, the only poster I’ve seen lying about what other people have said… is also you. The only poster I’ve seen clinging blinkerdly to a discredited ideology… is still you. The only poster who is unable or unwilling to debate like an adult… I think you can see where I’m going with this, can’t you?
Nm
It’s an interesting coincidence that he reappeared in this thread just a few days after CCitizen announced that he was taking a break.
Funnily enough, CCitizen suddenly became very active on the SDMB during a two month period this fall when Jack of Words made only two posts.
In that case, this should be very familiar to you:
“Sir, I admit your general rule,
That every poet is a fool,
But you yourself may serve to show it,
That you’re also a pedantic douchebag.”
Oookay. Well, whoever is paying you to spout pretentious gibberish on messageboards is certainly getting their money’s worth.
I’m rather puzzled as to why anybody would want to pay for that in the first place, but after all everybody’s got their own quirks about how they like to spend their money. And your rates sound fairly affordable.
You are emotionally deaf. There is nothing in common between the two posters.
You are very naive if you believe that CCitizen has been presenting himself honestly here. He’s an obvious troll and likely a sock for someone if not JoW.
CCitizen is the same fellow who admired Joshua Goldberg’s talent in creating rabid feminist Tanya Cohen and also ISIS jihadist Australi Witness.
CCitizen and Jack of Words don’t sound anything alike, but they do sound like characters in a play you very much don’t want to see.
Jack also reappeared–with a vengeance–right after I–forgive me–mentioned his name in this thread.
‘A Confederacy of Dunces’ immediately comes to mind.
He’s opened another goddamn feminism thread, simultaneously complaining about how women are always trying to portray themselves as victims and portraying men as victims. No, I’m not linking to it.
I didn’t think it was possible, but this newest thread seems to be even more lunatic. Apparently male victimization starts in elementary school. Women take all the good spots in college. It’s a Vast Conspiracy.
What he writes about is so divorced from reality, which people are already pointing out, that I start to question his sanity. If he’s not a troll, he’s got some serious problems.
Men are a major beneficiary of affirmative action in college. Gender-blind admissions would mean far more women and far fewer men. Because the women have much better records. Most likely because boys are discriminated against beginning in elementary school. That must be it.
Strange the things that stick in the mind. In an idle moment, I went and counted them. I made it 25 (twentyfive). So “six or so”, give or take nineteen. But hey, feminists and statistics, what can you do…
I’ve also got at least as many posts in non-‘angry’ threads, as I have in the ones where you want to paint me as ‘angry’. But hey, feminists and facts, what can you do…
Good move. There’s a lotta money in poetry and unproduced screenplays.
Awwww that’s so cute. 