Fghfh



  • I found out he's just a troll. A troll is someone who intentionally posts off-topic or crazy things on a message board to incite emotional/angry responses. He does it for fun, its not an OCD thing at all…

    Oy! After all that time too!



  • @Danielle:

    I found out he's just a troll. A troll is someone who intentionally posts off-topic or crazy things on a message board to incite emotional/angry responses. He does it for fun, its not an OCD thing at all…

    Oy! After all that time too!

    You liar.
    I do not do this "for fun", I do it because I genuinely have a problem.

    You think this is a joke, well you are a sick minded individual who knows nothing about me.



  • @MasterCracker:

    Stupid is as stupid does

    JointCracker Please Help!
    :?

    Thank you for editing that, I cannot help how I am



  • @Danielle:

    I found out he's just a troll. A troll is someone who intentionally posts off-topic or crazy things on a message board to incite emotional/angry responses. He does it for fun, its not an OCD thing at all…

    Oy! After all that time too!

    So Danielle, you think I woke up one morning and suddenly had this exact and specific story in my mind to make up about getting punched in the back of the neck in a tech lesson in year 8/9 for no reason by someone called sam?



  • "You think this is a joke, well you are a sick minded individual who knows nothing about me."

    Good I can use this as a law school exercise.

    If "A," then "B" and "C"

    A = Me thinking you are a joke

    (conclusions)
    B = Me thus being a sick minded individual
    C = Me knowing nothing about you

    Well, this argument is structurally inaccurate. According to you, if we have "A," we must have both "B" and "C."

    Now, we may have "B." That one is up for debate.

    We know that we don't have C, because I do, in fact, know something about you. I know all kinds of things about you: You're a British kid, you are obsessed with online forums (although the reason is also up for debate), and so on.

    According to your argument, if I don't have C, then I cannot possibly have A. Ahh, but I do have A. EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD HAS "A"

    Therefore, we have A, we may or may not have B, and we do not have C.

    Thus, your argument is CRAP.

    You've been lawyered sucka.



  • @Danielle:

    "You think this is a joke, well you are a sick minded individual who knows nothing about me."

    Good I can use this as a law school exercise.

    If "A," then "B" and "C"

    A = Me thinking you are a joke

    (conclusions)
    B = Me thus being a sick minded individual
    C = Me knowing nothing about you

    Well, this argument is structurally inaccurate. According to you, if we have "A," we must have both "B" and "C."

    Now, we may have "B." That one is up for debate.

    We know that we don't have C, because I do, in fact, know something about you. I know all kinds of things about you: You're a British kid, you are obsessed with online forums (although the reason is also up for debate), and so on.

    According to your argument, if I don't have C, then I cannot possibly have A. Ahh, but I do have A. EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD HAS "A"

    Therefore, we have A, we may or may not have B, and we do not have C.

    Thus, your argument is CRAP.

    You've been lawyered sucka.

    I never implied half of what you are saying



  • "I never implied half of what you are saying"

    Here, you are saying that you did the OPPOSITE of imply half of what I am saying. The word "Never" refers to time, but for the sake of this exercise, we'll assume you mean "did not."

    "I did not imply half of what you are saying."

    Okay. What is the logical opposite of "half?"

    Logically, half means the same as "some, but not most"

    The opposite, therefore, is "most, if not all" OR "none"

    We know "none" does not apply here because you did, in fact imply that if I thought you were a joke, I was a sick minded individual who knew nothing about you."

    Thus, "most, if not all" is the only feasable logical apposite of "half."

    If you did NOT imply half, you therefore implies "most, if not all."

    Yes sir, you DID imply that if I thought you were a joke, "I was a sick minded individual who knew nothing about you."

    …and with that, I redirect you to my previous argument.

    Lawyered.



  • @Danielle:

    "I never implied half of what you are saying"

    Here, you are saying that you did the OPPOSITE of imply half of what I am saying. The word "Never" refers to time, but for the sake of this exercise, we'll assume you mean "did not."

    "I did not imply half of what you are saying."

    Okay. What is the logical opposite of "half?"

    Logically, half means the same as "some, but not most"

    The opposite, therefore, is "most, if not all" OR "none"

    We know "none" does not apply here because you did, in fact imply that if I thought you were a joke, I was a sick minded individual who knew nothing about you."

    Thus, "most, if not all" is the only feasable logical apposite of "half."

    If you did NOT imply half, you therefore implies "most, if not all."

    Yes sir, you DID imply that if I thought you were a joke, "I was a sick minded individual who knew nothing about you."

    …and with that, I redirect you to my previous argument.

    Lawyered.

    I hoped you would say this.

    In many of my posts I go on and on about specific details, like you are here.

    People tell me to grow up, accept it, move on, but do not pay any attention to what I am saying.

    So by doing that to you, I hope you realise how frustrating it is.


    And to the earlier post that MasterCracker posted before he changed his mind and edited it:

    Many people say they are on sams side, and feel sorry for when i must have annoyed him.

    However I stress once again, in this year at school I was very quiet and shy, never even spoke to the boy.

    So if he punched me today, 8th april 2010, then yes, of course i would support him because i am annoying.
    But at this time I did nothing.


Log in to reply