You have, of course, gone back to the thread in which you pitted Tamerlane and cleared this up, haven’t you? Oh wait, you haven’t… Maybe you should.
I’m confused, isn’t “killing kittens” just a euphamism?
Yes, it’s true that animal shelters in the U.S. practice euphamasia.
Well, OK, but make sure you keep up the necessary redundancies, Mister!
Shouldn’t that be mew-thanasia?
Regards,
Shodan
I appreciate the verbosity. So let’s see. It somehow started with the Dutchman saying he took a cat to the shelter because it peed where it shouldn’t, and then the dominoes keep falling in endless pit threads.
Seems to be par for the course, considering the holidays. When everyone is back at work on Monday, we can go on with important stuff: Bush, Jack Chick, parking in alleys, call centers and phonemarketers. Oh and Wal-Mart.
Fighting ignorance is what this message board is all about.
Either you lied in your above statement or you too suffer a lack of reading comprehension.
Please explain to me how that is not asking for clarification.
I don’t think you have reading comprehension problems. You’re too smart. I think you are as human as the rest of us, and are influenced by agendas that all to often will sacrifice the truth. Sure, my above complaint regarding you is minor as far as the rest of dopers is concerned, but it undermines me (as insignificant a little human being as I am, with as little concern for my justice in this community that I perceive) and therefore is a big deal to me.
I’m not taking this personally. To be honest I still remember how many years ago you bravely gave me comfort and support amidst a barrage of doper attacks on me in a particular thread. I’ll always be gratefull for that. I’m fairly confident that you’ll be able to handle the above criticism without any harm to yourself or your status here.
hey, asshole, you clipped the quote early. you missed the part where he said “In the thread itself”. wanna make another remark about other’s reading comprehension?
You truly are a moron, aren’t you? As **wring ** has already pointed out, my statement referred to your failure to ask for clarification in the thread in which the supposed offense was committed, that is, “Human-Animal Moral Code.” In fact, Tamerlane defended you to an extent there against Contrapuntal’s statements. Your “request for clarification” was in your pit thread on Tamerlane. Opening an additional thread in the pit was quite unnecessary, and is the object of this parody thread.
And I would also say that editing my statement to cut out the relevant part constitutes dishonesty on your part - all the more bizarre since it can be seen in its entirety only a few posts up in this very thread.
You know, I wonder why people such as you who are so hypersensitive about their “reputation” or “respect” have so little idea of how to go about earning it. Surely you have been around long enough to realize how readily a pit thread can turn on an OP. I would think anyone with the common sense of a flatworm would want to be very, very sure of their ground before pitting someone like Tamerlane. As it turns out, you misunderstood the import of his “hopefully” - as he has now said, he was merely expressing the hope that taking the cat to the shelter would not result in its eventual euthanization (which it might have in many shelters), not questioning your honesty. That could easily have been determined in the original thread.
The only way now for you to salvage even a shred of respect from this debacle is go back to your pit thread on Tamerlane, apologize for your misunderstanding of his remark and for your pitting of him, and ask that the thread be closed. That would be a far better strategy than deliberately editing my quote here to distort its meaning, and implying that I’m the liar. But I’m not going to hold my breath.
I can’t say that I remember the case to which you refer. But I call 'em as I sees 'em.
Given that the criticism was entirely unwarranted, I’m pretty confident of that myself.
Here, here, well spoken, Bruce.
So . . . this is a thread whose main complaint (I gather from parsing what is obviously a joke thread, which I thought was against Pit rules) is that there have been too many pointless threads split off from one particular thread . . . and part of the joke is that you split off yet another thread to make your clever point?
Why isn’t this locked?
Considering that he’s yet to deign to return to his Tamerlane pitting, perhaps he’ll admit here that he was wrong to do it.
… Sorry, I could barely keep a straight face for that. Nah, I guess he won’t.
It’s a parody thread, which isn’t prohibited in the Pit when linked to the thread(s) that prompted it.
Hah! I love that!
As for the OP, I don’t care. People are pitting people all over the place for imaginary slights. Business as usual. I’m just posting because that was a brilliant play on words, and I wanted to let Shodan know it was appreciated.
Crap. I forgot my links. Mods, would you go back to the OP and put a few more in?
Here’s a drama, there’s a drama,
And another little drama,
Fuzzy drama, funny drama,
drama, drama,
fuck.