I’m new here to the sport of interpreting Scottish, but I think what he’s getting at is that a ban on guns would not be quite as disastrous as the ban on alcohol was during the 1920’s. The clue being the capital P in Prohibition. I think.
I don’t agree. I never typed the word “Nazi”, I linked to a site that was comparing concentration camps. A Wiki cite that Scott is so fond of. I would not have even used a Wiki link except I was trying to debunk his assertion that Wiki backed him up and I just grabbed the first Wiki link that mentioned Japanese American interment. I guess I need to be more discerning about what parts of cites I use, I certainly wasn’t trying to invoke Godwin.
P.S. I see that the cite you used to define Godwin is Wiki 
(1,040 posts and 22,649 views later.)
Then again, perhaps not.
Oh, it’s quite possible you’re right. And that might even be an argument that could be made. The trouble is that it was not made, just thrown out there. And we can’t be sure of what it is, or why he thinks so, or what it is based on, or much of anything else. And a week later, he would be posting “Why are you still arguing about gun control? You keep posting arguments that I have already refuted.”
And then the discussion changes to"how can you be so fucking clueless, you poo-flinging iguana felcher" until the effort of deciphering becomes too great for someone, and Scott wins another thread.
Regards,
Shodan
bagpipes skirling
I daenna believe that a ban on the wee handguns would be, och, the same thing as Prohibtion.
Now that’s Scottish.
I’m with you, Shodan. If one is genuinely interested in a topic posited in a particular thread and then Scott appears, I can see how it can be frustrating to see the thread derailed by his mere presence. I.e., he posts, thread derails, thread starts to get back on track, then he posts again, asking what the hubbub is about when he won already, thus ending any chance of the original topic being addressed ever again …
Oh, and VegemiteMoose: Och, dinna maech me come afta you. Or the VegemiteSquirrel gets it. Och.
Very astute, you and your anonymous inspiration both.
It’s too bad that Scott has no interest in noticing just how smart some of the people around here are.
Yet IN THIS THREAD, you’ve repeated the same problems for which people have criticized you. You have only now recanted the internment position. You STILL believe you “won” our discussion concerning the mosiach. You haven’t really acknowledged the dozens of people that have told you you have an unreliable ability to judge “winning;” instead you have come back to this thread to trumpet other times you feel you have “won.”
I call that many things besides “self-improvement.”
I include you among those. It is somewhat intimidating that many of the people whom I debate hold post graduate degrees in the subjects that interest me, like philosophy, theology, and politics. I do read mountains of material on my topics of interest, including the original classics. But nothing quite so arms a man for rhetorical wrestling as a top-rate formal education. That’s one reason I bristle so much when people accuse me of seldom admitting error, and also one reason that I track my admissions the way I do. I honestly learn from the mistakes I make. I review them from time to time so as not to repeat them. On the smartness scale, I might likely be far below most of you. But on the learning scale, your advantages pay off for me. I have far more to learn from you than you do from me. Damn, I don’t know why I’m babbling about this. But you reminded me of it, and this thread is a glacier at sea anway…
I’ve said that on several occasions on these boards, but I am neither the first nor the only one to make that observation.
[Joel Flieshman] Nothing sadder than a 30 yr old child prodigy. [/JF]
It’s a delightful thing, actually, that in the three or four areas I seem to know more about than anyone I know in real life, I wouldn’t even make the list around here. I like being around people smarter and more knowledgeable than me.
Me too, which is why I’ve always come back, I guess, even when I was pissed off. It was the same for me in chess. When I was a C-player, I hung around with experts and masters. Through their kindness and patience, I became a much better player.
I thought so, too, until you people openly mocked me about the three-days-at-school-without-an-accident deal. Now I have nothing left to brag about except my phenomenal ability to produce bellybutton lint.
For those blessed with self-awareness, this board can be a humbling place. For those not so burdened, it can be a place to inspire a record-setting Pit thread.
I guess … in a way … EVERYBODY wins!
How dare you speak of belly-buttion lint in the presence of an outie? Don’t you know I’m tragically unable to produce my own lint, through no fault of my own, and must lurk patiently, a pathetic snivelling wretch, in the laundromat, surreptitiously stealing lint from the filters of dryers tumbling the clothing of insies? Oh, the humanity – and you, sir or madam, have the gall, nay, the unmitigated gall to mock my sufferings!
Put your hands over your head, and set away from the psychoanalysis. The post was meant to show examples of me being acting intelligent. The gun thread ran for three pages, till I posted the following:
Not one of the other posters or lurkers stepped in and pointed that out. The conclusion that leads me to was that I was the only one who saw the obvious.
While it is possible for those words to apply to me sometimes, in this case, his actual words were:
and they were aimed at those who had been bickering for the past two pages of that thread.
Actually, the way to tell was to read the entire rest of that thread. :rolleyes: Basically, “ban” in that thread meant whatever the other posters wanted it to me, depending on the poster.
[/QUOTE]
examples of me acting intelligent :smack:
And I should have killed the remaining quote, too.
Holy fuck, if ever there was a poster deserving of a 20 page pitting, it is you. To paraphrase Billy Madison, we are all dumber for having read your posts.
You have made over 3700 posts since joining 5 months ago. I weep for the straight dope.
Ah, I see. You expect self improvement to begin instantly. Also, I can not respond to criticism. Got it. In addition, none of my posts earlier today actual equals “I was wrong.” I see.
Besides, it seemed like I was saying “The messiah will have the following qualities”, while you were say"Nuh-uh."
However, it turns out were were not. Had that been the debate, I would have been correct to have said what I said, but it turns out I was not. I have in fact acknowledged that, via my posting what the actual debate was about, in your eyes, in this very thread.
Btw, here is a link to a previous thread regarding the claim that Jesus was a historical personage. Interesting note. It ended with someone saying some logically indefensible claims, and no one calling them on it. Interesting.
Jesus H. Christ
tomndebb, if you’re still reading this, please close it. That is, of course, up to you, but not only has this thread gone beyond ridiculous, I am becoming more and more convinced that Scott Plaid is enjoying the attention.
I should have stayed away when I dropped out 400 posts ago.
Model, you want me to stop doing this? Well, it is not because I enjoy attention. It is because I simply do not understand what is wrong. Thus, the way to stop me would be to tell me what, preciously was wrong with my posting: “Whoops, if it was the thread I thought it was, I would have been right. However, it wasn’t. Well, I admitted to it, earlier in this thread” Break it down for me, if you want me to understand, 'hokay?