# The Ryan, Master of Semantics **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 27, 2002, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923 "2002-04-27T06:18:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2002, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/101 "2002-05-06T22:00:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > \*\*\*\*Esprix,\*\*, brother, let go and walk away. > > You’re wrestling with Jello, causing it no injury and straining yourself trying to get a hold. And all that blue-green goo doesn’t do a thing for your complexion! 🙂 \*\* **Poly** , **Esprix** , I think you’re being terribly mean to poor ol’ **Theryan**! Look. Let me see if I can translate his position. Having discriminating tastes is a good thing, right? I mean, you’d be _flattered_ if someone said you had a discriminating palate when tasting wine. So, really, what **Theryan** has said is that the kid who can’t bring his boyfriend to the Prom should be _flattered_! I hope that clears it up. Fenris ---
**Author:** ![iampunha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/74df32/32.png) [@iampunha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iampunha)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2002, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/102 "2002-05-06T23:01:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > **Esprix,** , brother, let go and walk away. > > You’re wrestling with Jello, Paging **matt\_mcl** … **matt\_mcl** , please come to the white courtesy phone in room 5. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2002, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/103 "2002-05-06T23:17:22Z")
God, how I’ve missed you, **Fenris**. 😃 Esprix ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2002, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/104 "2002-05-06T23:17:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Waverly \* > I beg to differ. Just as you avoided the question when Esprix first phrased it, you are avoiding it now that I have specifically asked you what your answer would have been had ‘hinder’ been substituted for ‘hurt.’ Esprix brought up two issues (one was who it “effected” (yes, that’s right, momentary spelling lapses are “trodding on the English language with such abandon” :rolleyes:), the other what the intent was). I choose to address one of them, believing it futile to reason with him on the other. I really do not understand why you find it so shocking that when someone makes it quite clear that he has no intention of having a rational debate with me, I feel disinclined to answer his every question. [quote] Emphasis mine on definition 4.[/qutoe] You had to ignore three definitions to find one to your liking? > [@](#): > > you would prefer to sidetrack intelligent discussions with objections to words you obviously don’t even fucking fully understand. This from someone who thinks that “argumentum ad absurdum” is an argument that’s absurd. Polycarp: I already addressed that. I **specifcally** said that I didn’t think that that was what you meant. I was trying to show how a literal meaning of the term did not make sense, and thus we needed to figure out what we each meant by it. > [@](#): > > While it may be a definition for discrimination in a dictionary, it shed absolutely no light on the issue at hand so far as I could tell. That was my entire point: that I could not rely on a dictionary to provide an explanation of what you meant by “discrimination”, and I was therefore asking you what you meant. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2002, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/105 "2002-05-06T23:21:26Z")
That was supposed to be yes, that’s right, momentary spelling lapses are “trodding on the English language with such abandon” :rolleyes: ), the other what the intent was) and > [@](#): > > Emphasis mine on definition 4. You had to ignore three definitions to find one to your liking? > [@](#): > > you would prefer to sidetrack intelligent discussions with objections to words you obviously don’t even fucking fully understand. This from someone who thinks that “argumentum ad absurdum” is an argument that’s absurd. I guess now that’s posted even more typos, I must be even more hypocritical, huh? ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2002, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/106 "2002-05-07T00:20:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Esprix \* > **God,** Cite? > [@](#): > > **how I’ve** You, you, you. That’s all you ever talk about. You. It _aaaaaa-lways_ **has** to be about **you** , doesn’t it **Esprix** :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > \*\* missed you, Fenris\*\*. _ **MODS!!!** _ **Esprix** just threatened me! I want him banned, readmitted, banned again, re-readmitted, adminstered a strong spanking by **Uncle Beer** then re-rebanned! If he’s not, then I shall Sue.[sup]\*[/sup] “missed” is defined as “the act of aiming incorrectly, usually with regards to bullets!” He _admits_ to shooting at me, probably from a grassy gnoll[sup]\*\*[/sup]! “You” is defined as “me” unless it means you. But it doesn’t this time. Why the Hell can’t you all just use plain English like me (which could mean “you” but doesn’t.) > [@](#): > > **Esprix** Cite? Fenris [sup]\*[/sup] Some small minded people might think I mean "bring legal action against. However they’re missing the fact that “Sue” is a woman’s name and I’m not afraid to bring her onto the Board if I have to! [sup]\*\*[/sup] Some small minded people might think I meant “knoll”, but those small-minded people would be wrong. I mean “gnoll” as in [Dungeons and Dragons](http://www.intrafin.be/html/products/miniatures/tsr/index.php). **Esprix** was sitting on his shoulders when he shot at me! And the Gnoll was grassy because he never washes. You could grow potatoes behind his ears. And the fact that **Esprix** would collude with such a creature to assassinate me just goes to show! ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2002, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/107 "2002-05-07T00:40:01Z")
> [@](#): > > You had to ignore three definitions to find one to your liking? **Ryan** , I’ve got to say, that is hilarious! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![SisterCoyote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@SisterCoyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SisterCoyote)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2002, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/108 "2002-05-07T00:40:43Z")
**Fenris** … Did I mention that it’s pleasing to have your sarcastically friendly presence on the boards again? Will you marry me? ---
**Author:** ![Waverly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/57b2e6/32.png) [@Waverly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waverly)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2002, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/109 "2002-05-07T01:13:17Z")
> [@](#): > > _Issuish forth from the maw of Ryan:_ > This from someone who thinks that “argumentum ad absurdum” is an argument that’s absurd. Now who is lying? We both know I gave you a definition that included the concept of extrapolating an argument to absurd lengths. I’ll thank you not to tell me what I think. I call upon all the mods, administrators, Uncle Cecil, Al Gore (inventor of the internet,) and the cast from Cats to ban you for this transgression. > [@](#): > > _Further issuance from our enigmatic troll:_ > You had to ignore three definitions to find one to your liking? **Newsflash!** Only the first definition is to be used from any dictionary entry. Look for the new _Single Defintion OED_, coming soon to a bookstore near you. Could you make yourself look any more foolish? C’mon now, give it a try. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2002, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/110 "2002-05-07T03:57:13Z")
Well, Ryan, You could just post three word rebuttals from now on. You are wrong. Since none of the best minds on the board seem to be able to understand your arguments, and you find their counter arguments entirely lacking in logical rigor, it would be pointless to do more. That way you would have fulfilled your own purpose, winning, and saved a great deal of time and effort. Nothing would be lost, since no one understands what you say, and you don’t like reading things that prove you wrong. Hey, everyone, from now on, just tell Ryan he wins, and let it go at that. Think of the bandwidth, man! The interchanges between other posters need not be altered, of course, since the real point of a thread is of no interest to the Ryan, only the final score. He wins, we continue our pointless illogical ramblings. Everyone is happy! I could be wrong, of course. Do you (Ryan) have some other goal in mind besides winning, when you post? I wouldn’t want to interfere with your desire to actually communicate, but you do seem to have made it clear that being understood if of little interest. But then, I don’t understand you all that well. Tris. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2002, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/111 "2002-05-07T13:47:58Z")
> [@](#): > > strong spanking by Uncle Beer First jello and now spankings. I need a cold shower. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2002, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/112 "2002-05-07T15:44:48Z")
Well done, **Trisk** Esprix ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2002, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/113 "2002-05-07T19:14:04Z")
Fair enough, **TheRyan**. With your comment to me on the original thread, I’ll attempt to rejoin the fray over there. Given that it was your intent to get me to spell out a definition of “discrimination” and that I missed your point, perhaps you had a right to be offended by my bringing up the “other definition” issue here – I was not intentionally badgering but baffled by why you had even posted the “discriminating tastes” sense. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/114 "2002-05-08T00:08:37Z")
Triskadecamus, you are wrong. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/115 "2002-05-08T00:14:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Waverly \* > Now who is lying? So do you **not** think that “argumentum ad absurdum” is an argument that’s absurd? > [@](#): > > **Newsflash!** Only the first definition is to be used from any dictionary entry. I’m confused now. First you say only the fourth definition is to be used, then you say that only the first is to be used. Which is it? > [@](#): > > Could you make yourself look any more foolish? I suppose if I paid more attention to you I might learn something in that area. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/116 "2002-05-08T00:16:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by The Ryan \* > \*\*Triskadecamus, you are wrong. \*\* Well, you win! Tris ---
**Author:** ![Waverly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/57b2e6/32.png) [@Waverly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waverly)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/117 "2002-05-08T02:51:13Z")
Agreed. Ryan wins in his own special way. It took me a while, but I finally learned my cat has no aptitude for physics and quit discussing the topic with her. I’m thinking I’ve learned a similar lesson with the Ryan. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/118 "2002-05-08T07:05:08Z")
Pig. Singing. Well, you get the picture. Esprix ---
**Author:** ![iampunha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/74df32/32.png) [@iampunha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iampunha)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/119 "2002-05-08T12:42:23Z")
What a waste of your best pearls, **Esprix** … [sub]I got the reference, right? Huh? I did, right? Right?[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Sauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@Sauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sauron)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2002, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923/120 "2002-05-08T14:13:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by The Ryan \* > I’m confused now. First you say only the fourth definition is to be used, then you say that only the first is to be used. Which is it? Disingenuous and duplicitous. Nowhere did **Waverly** say “only the fourth definition is be used.” He/she pointed out one of the many definitions of the word in question (as you’re so fond of noting, **TheRyan** , words can have more than one meaning). To engage in this type of rebuttal is ridiculous in the extreme. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-master-of-semantics/105923.md?page=7)