| 02 June 2003 at 11.40.34 ZuluTime
|
Posted by Hunter [12.211.202.152 - 12-211-202-152.client.attbi.com] on 02 June 2003 at 11.40.34 ZuluTime:
In Reply to: Checkers? posted by Seraphina22 on 01 June 2003 at 15.55.04 ZuluTime:
Time to switch modes and throw a few colours into the mix....
I've never really heard the term "checkmate" used in checkers. Generally speaking, it's used in chess.
No shit? I mean, really? Are you that fucking stupid that you didn't get it? Shall I dissect the fucking joke for you? You said "Checkmate"; I responded with "You'd best stick to checkers; you've got a better chance of winning...," implying that it was a game more suited for your intellectual capabilities. "Stick to checkers" in no way indicates that "Checkmate" is used within said game. And while it's worked as an insult in far many more ways than I'd ever HOPED, I'd never have thought that you would be so stupid as to not get it. It's really very simple. "Stick to checkers, because you're not smart enough to play chess, in which the term "Checkmate" is used." THINK!
But I'm learning all kinds of new things now that I've been privileged to be in the presence of people like you.
Are you? You're certainly not learning sarcasm...you must be a slow learner.
Allow me to borrow your method of cut and paste to make my next move.
It's called quoting, and it's existed far longer than I've been using it. The mere fact that there's an option in the messageboard script to 'quote original message' demonstrates that.
"You alternately have enough experience to know what 'all' we do is, and haven't spend any time in the room at all. Now which is it?"
The message that I posted was intended for the author of the message it was following up --this Gremlin character. I took the time (out of morbid curiousity) to browse through this website that we're all looking at at the moment. So any opinions I have formed about him are based on not only the roughly 8-10 hours I've spent in your chat room, but on what I've found on this website. Why so defensive, dear?
Please demonstrate the defensiveness. While I'm waiting: if you'd taken the time to browse through this website, you'd still be browsing. This website is merely the first [and oldest] in the Gremlin empire. This 'Gremlin character' is the administrator of this board, and the webmaster of nearly the whole of the Gremlin Empire. And no, he's not the one who called it that. Unfortunately, our obsessive expert on the history of gremlin.net is serving a sentence for stalking and the transmission of interstate threats at this moment; perhaps you can find out who coined the term "Grempire" from him when he's allowed back online, if at all.
"And in what instance was there a situation in which a 'valid argument', or even a counterargument, required from Gremlin?"
Well, obviously he saw something that made him want to "argue." I can't imagine what else would provoke him to call someone a "muttfucker."
You're really quite lousy at this 'armchair psychology' gig you've taken, aren't you? But let's look at the evidence..... Number of returns on "muttfucker" in the original transcript: 0 And here's the first instance of an interaction between you and Gremlin:
LOG DATA Fri, 30 May 2003 08:02:33 gremlin_net, ATHEIST vs. CHRISTIAN CHAT:1
seraphina22 : Excuse me..I'm sorry..did you just say..Jesus never existed?
Carrying on with that, edited for time constraints, of course; you can feel free to match them up with the original transcript.
gremlin_net : seraphina22: no. I said that, evidently, he never existed. Or, if you like, he never existed in fact.
seraphina22 : I mean...I don't think that His existence has ever been in question. Its whether or not He was the Messiah that can't be proven by "fact", as you call it.
gremlin_net : seraphina22: there's no evidence that the guy existed at all.
seraphina22 : On the contrary, gremlin, there are plenty of records to prove it. Let's not forget, that wasn't all that long ago.
seraphina22 : Historically speaking
gremlin_net : seraphina22: you're asserting that this guy existed in fact, based on evidence?
seraphina22 : There is no question that he existed.
seraphina22 : Don't you watch the History channel?
gremlin_net : seraphina22: great. Provide evidence supporting your assertion that Y'shua existed in fact.
seraphina22 : Well..I don't personally have a copy of the records.
gremlin_net : seraphina22: is that a concession?
seraphina22 : Not at all
gremlin_net : seraphina22: then it's not evidence. Strike One.
seraphina22 : I can no more prove to you that Jesus..the man..existed than I can prove to you that Caesar did. But you don't question that, do you?
seraphina22 : Well anyway. I'm not going to argue about it.
gremlin_net : seraphina22: then you concede.
seraphina22 : If ceasing to argue even though I still disagree is conceding..then yes..in that sense..I concede. Pick up the cards, you win.
gremlin_net : seraphina22 concedes that christ never existed in fact. We won't expect any more assertions to that effect.
I would continue quoting the original transcript, but I feel most people are smart enough to go back and read it for themselves. The next thing you say [after you disappear for a while] is about taking a roll call on faiths. You focus on Gremlin's response of nullifidian, asking him what it is. Then you decline to look it up, because, gee, it's SO much work. Which tells us quite a bit about you, but anyway.... But hey, back to that muttfucker bit.... OH! Right there it is. Knees don't bow, Muttfucker; they hinge --nt--, in reply to your little bit in which you deny that you lie, but go back to using the theists' top ten quotes. Tra la la, oh how happy it must be to live in a land where we can make things up as we go along.... Too fucking bad we don't live there....
"Actually, one can argue that it will/won't happen, not only based on biological terms, but based on the surrounding text.."
Ok. Maybe I'm guilty of the dreaded word misusage here. People can argue anything. What I should have said, I guess, is that he can provide no FACTS..hard physical EVIDENCE that it isn't going to happen. That's what it's all about anyway, isn't it? Facts and hard physical evidence?
No more than you can [or are willing to] provide facts and physical evidence that it will. Isn't that convenient. By the way, still waiting on that preponderance of evidence showing 'Jesus' to have been the Messiah, because boy, is that gonna help your case toward the existence of Gawhd.
"I'll just take it this way: you have no fucking clue what a strawman is"
You're exactly right. I don't. I think I actually admitted that in the text of my message when I said "pardon my misuse of the terms, it's all new to me." But you left that part out because it would have made that line of your message pointless.
I left out a part of your message? Really? Let's just see.... First, the entire original quote:
This seems to be a trend for you --this whole picking- out-grammatical-errors-and-apparent-word-misusages- thing. When you can't come up with a valid argument, (and I mean, let's face it, you can't really argue that this won't happen considering it's speaking of things to come) then you either: A. Call it a "Strawman" (or one of various other terms that you or somebody like you has coined); B. Refer to its author or speaker as a Fraud, which clearly discredits anything that person will ever say again; or C. Point out grammatical errors and/or word misusage as mentioned above. Now, I gotta be completely honest, (even though I have been deemed a known liar and fraud by the powers that be in your realm) when I realized what you meant by your comment, I thought to myself: "He's got a point there." But the fact is, most people of average intelligence are going to comprehend what the translation of this passage means. I mean, I've never heard of anybody having visions of bodiless knees leaning over, or mouthless tongues speaking out truths they've just realized, upon reading that passage. But then again, I guess I haven't spent enough time with folks like you, huh? At any rate, I thought you might be interested in knowing that most dictionaries (you can check dictionary.com if you have any doubts) list "To incline the body or head or bend THE KNEE in greeting, consent, courtesy, acknowledgment, submission, or veneration" as one of many definitions for the word "bow." Checkmate.
Now where is that line where you pardon yourself.... Oh my. Oh fucking dear. IT DOESN'T EXIST. And, by the way: if you look, I didn't leave any of your message out. You're just too easy. I don't even have to try.
Oh the fucking PAIN. I'll bet that hurts....
Doesn't that just fucking hurt.
"You've shown yourself to be [a fraud.] Truth in advertising...."
I'm still waiting on the hard physical EVIDENCE that I'm a liar. Nobody can seem to tell me what exactly it was that I lied about. I'm alot of things....Liar isn't one of them.
Hard physical evidence? Okay. How about just a few immediate examples. SCROLL UP.
You asserted that I left out a bit in quoting your message; that's a lie.
You asserted that you stated that you didn't understand the terms, and that you might misuse them; that's a lie. In fact, that's a fucking blatant lie, because "I might misuse them" doesn't even work in that context.
You asserted that Gremlin 'saw something that made him want to argue', in reference to my comment, which was in reference to the original transcript[s], and then commented on the use of the word 'muttfucker', which, logically, would have appeared in the transcript[s] I was referring to. But wait, I'll bet there's more. Let's move on, shall we?
"Try being honest more often."
Trust me, I could have made it alot farther in life so far if I wasn't so honest. Being honest is a handicap in today's world. It's especially crippling in job interviews.....but, I digress.
Honesty is crippling in job interviews? Since when? I thought it was a crime to lie on job applications....
"And what's wrong with pointing out grammatical errors and general improper use of words?"
There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. I do it all the time. In fact, I was doing it ALOT as I browsed through this website.
Oh really? Where? Point out the grammatical errors and 'general improper use of words'? And maybe a few spelling errors while you're at it? Come on; give us a little evidence for once....
But, when you are force-fed humility as I have been in the past few years, you learn that being so anal when it comes to things that insignificant really can be a pain in alot of people's asses. Why do we feel compelled to magnify other people's minor mistakes? That's a good question to ponder.
Funny; I haven't focused on any minor mistakes. If I was, this message would be a great deal longer....
"Of course not. You weren't allowed to sit at that table in lunch."
I'm not sure this one even warrants a response. I don't like playing name calling games. I got over that years ago --and so did most of the other people sitting at my lunch table.
If it didn't warrant a response, why did you respond? Was it just another chance to be bombastic?
And by the way, you can't fool me; the only people sitting at your lunch table were either your invisible friends, or just like you. In the case of the latter, they're still just like you. They didn't forget to grow up, they just did it in such a way as to take the 'moral high ground' every chance they get. And by that, I don't mean 'doing the right thing'. I mean 'attempting to insult someone by pretending you 'grew out of doing such childish things' everso long ago....
How fucking quaint.
"Let's list ALL the definitions, not just the little one that supports your delusion....Let's see...and only the last few cover what you're talking about. In fact, you had to use the very last one to back up your statement."
Ok. I'm not sure what it is that you're saying here. In order to use a word it has to encompass all of that word's definitions in its context?
Nope. I'm saying it has to encompass at least one, and you shouldn't have to dig all the way to the bottom for an archaic definition. And that was covered by someone far more capable than myself, anyway. Two someones, and the one of them that did go over it in detail, surprisingly, doesn't even speak English as a first language....
"And now, let's get into basic anatomy...."
Did you draw that picture yourself? Nice work. Unfortunately, having just had my knee reconstructed a while back, I know more about the anatomy of the knee than I could have ever hoped for.
Ooh. So close. No. Lemme show you what it'd look like if I bothered to take five seconds to sketch out a knee and scan it in:
Tragically, that's far below my former ability.
But then again, it was pretty blatant that the drawing in the previous post wasn't mine. I don't own mediacentre.com; that's the property of the Ottawa Carleton Educational Media Centre; I certainly don't have the third level domain of grassroots.mediacentre.com, more properly grassroots.ocri.com. That belongs to Canada's SchoolNet GrassRoots Program. And as for the OCDEmead9 subsite? Well, you tell me if I'd be one of the people to submit a drawing of a knee to the 'wonderous grade five website'. I attended Ward L Meyers Elementary School in Muncy, PA for grade five, and that was rather a bit before there was such a thing as a 'website'. In fact, that was rather a bit before that particular school had computers that used anything but the 5/14, 1.2 meg floppy disks, and on Apples.
"Of course, the real problem here is that you infer bow [bou], while anyone with more than a 1000 word vocabulary who doesn't see 'down' after it is going to generally see 'bo' first.."
Let's all bow our heads and say a prayer for Hunter, shall we?
The 'we' again? Who's this group of people you keep talking to that's joining you in your opinion?
And by the way [Thank you Gremlin for remembering a skill I forgot after HighSchool]: Let [v] us [noun; subject] bow [v] our [adj] heads [direct obj] for [prep] Hunter [indirect obj]; shall [v] we [noun subject]
In that instance, since bow is a 'verb', these definitions apply:
From bow, 2,
v. intr.
To bend or curve downward; stoop.
To incline the body or head or bend the knee in greeting, consent, courtesy, acknowledgment, submission, or veneration.
To yield in defeat or out of courtesy; submit. See Synonyms at yield.
v. tr.
To bend (the head, knee, or body) to express greeting, consent, courtesy, acknowledgment, submission, or veneration.
To convey (greeting, for example) by bending the body.
To escort deferentially: bowed us into the restaurant.
To cause to acquiesce; submit.
To overburden: Grief bowed them down.
Now, having said all that --let us get down to the heart of the matter.
Yes, lets....
This all started because I quoted the "every knee shall bow" Bible verse in my first post here.
No. This all, in fact, started well before that. As the messageboard will show. It started in the chatroom; you just responded here to the posting of the transcripts.
Interestingly enough, nobody has commented on anything else I've said in my messages except for this verse.
Is that so? Really? I mean, NOBODY has commented on ANYTHING else? Interestingly enough, looking back, that's FALSE.
I'm sure you'll counter that with some juvenile insult - - "you're a fucking [insert juvenile name calling attempt here] and therefore not worthy of having us comment on your messages."
No; that's your style. Your bombastic self-reproach of "I'm not sure this warrants a comment but I'm gonna comment on it as much as possible to show how little comment it deserves....
And well, that's ok too. Why did I choose to quote a verse from a book that I've grown to question the genuineness of?
You question the genuineness of it, but you post lengthy diatribes about how you lost faith and almost killed yourself and turned back to gawhd. You question, yet 'you should try it real or not it feels GREAT".
And why did I choose that verse? Well, this is going to mean nothing to you, I'm sure..but you've compelled me to tell it. A few years ago, I had a horrible nightmare. It was one of those "end of the world" dreams, you know. People were running around everywhere dodging the balls of fire that fell from the sky. But what struck me most about this dream was the mysterious voice that I heard over and over saying "Every knee shall bow, every tongue shall confess." Over and over and over this played in my head until I woke up.
The power of Christ compells you! And yet, you're NOT a christian. Just like most christians deny they're theists....
Now upon discussing this dream with various people, I discovered that this was, in fact, a Bible verse --one that I had probably heard at some point in my life, but was certainly not familiar enough with to quote. Did this dream mean anything? Maybe not. Was it just another episode of lobal epilepsy? Perhaps.
Uh huh. And based on your track record thus far, we're supposed to believe you?
But, if nothing else, it has left me with a strange sense of loyalty to that particular verse. But anyway.
But anyway WHAT?
~Hunter
Matt Wright and DBasics Software Company