In other news
In the current news climate we see that some figures and events tend to dominate the front-pages heavily. Still, there a
What's your actual argument?
Suckbox: how dare you saying I accused my ex voted illegally
Also suckbox:
Pretty sure my ex voted illegally but I can't prove it. I know she wasn't legal, was doing nothing to get citizenship, and then posted an "I voted" sticker on her fb page
Also suckbox: *some incel bullshit*
Suckbox: how dare you saying I accused my ex voted illegally
Also suckbox:
Also suckbox: *some incel bullshit*
You're continuing to prove how much of an idiot you are although it's not like we should expect some self-awareness there.
Who said I was making an argument? Just read the exact words I wrote, bud.
I do have ask again though why the idea that a single individual voted when they weren't supposed to bothers you guys so much?
You do acknowledge that even if my ex just lied, or somehow got citizenship within a few months of us breaking up. that some people have voted when they weren't allowed, correct?
Ok well in that case I don't exactly think it's "top level thinking" but it is certainly correct.
Mostly cuz it clearly makes you so ****ing mad when anyone correctly says ‘show your work you bullshit artist’ and your response is essentially ‘no, lolololol I trol u’
Mostly cuz it clearly makes you so ****ing mad when anyone correctly says ‘show your work you bullshit artist’ and your response is essentially ‘no, lolololol I trol u’
Why would ask someone to prove something when they clearly acknowledge from the start that they don't have proof?
I also think Brazil sent special forces to train in Afghanistan for very idiosyncratic reasons. Being like "prove it" just wouldn't make any sense there. I can't.
The irony of you being the person who gets angriest about your nonsensical ragebait attempts
Ok good response. Super germane to the point I just made. You win.
Maybe you guys can keep track of the things you say yourselves so I don't have to find a post from 18 months and 2500 posts ago to prove what you yourselves said
Rickroll and Geezer, two of the guys with the most noted distorted senses of reality, want to constantly attack me for holding them to their own words
Rickroll, how about Doorbread having a point because you recently welched on a bet and had to have someone come track you down in other parts of the forum because you were avoiding paying out
You guys really need to worry about yourselves and get off my nuts
Notice at no point has Housenuts tried to prove that anyone was lying, hes just said it repeatedly like hes some vitcim
Maybe because he doesn't actually care if he said it or not. He just wants to troll around the forum and say whatever and cry foul when he gets pushed back on
Notice at no point has Housenuts tried to prove that anyone was lying, hes just said it repeatedly like hes some vitcim
Maybe because he doesn't actually care if he said it or not. He just wants to troll around the forum and say whatever and cry foul when he gets pushed back on
I'm not the one repeatedly calling people liars. What are these supposed lies you want me to prove? When I'm called a liar, I can't prove I didn't say something. You want me to post my 60,000 post history?
FreakDaddy called me a liar yesterday about a CNN headline, so I posted a screenshot of the headline.
You're so tiresome. You simply make stuff up and refuse to support your claims...while also being in strong favor of peer reviewed papers. Quite the conundrum.
Brother, when you say things and people directly call you out on them, when you are wrong, you just remove that point from your quote and never address it again
I'm certainly not going to put more effort into holding you accountable than you do yourself
I'm not the one repeatedly calling people liars. What are these supposed lies you want me to prove? When I'm called a liar, I can't prove I didn't say something. You want me to post my 60,000 post history? FreakDaddy called me a liar yesterday about a CNN headline, so I posted a screenshot of the headline. You're so tiresome. You simply make stuff up and refuse to support your
do you prefer "disingenuous"?
like it or not, you are one of the larger pieces of **** on this forum. you spend hour after hour trying to convince people you are not, which itself is proof that you are, but there are many many examples of you being a disingenuous piece of **** at best.
twist it any way you want for the next 10 pages and months...you are a piece of ****.
Notice at no point has Housenuts tried to prove that anyone was lying, hes just said it repeatedly like hes some vitcim
Maybe because he doesn't actually care if he said it or not. He just wants to troll around the forum and say whatever and cry foul when he gets pushed back on
He's made it clear that he is "here for the lolz". He is not a serious poster. No reason to read his posts or to not to put him on ignore at this point.
I've had many encounters with the useless POS housenuts. I thought about compiling his greatest hits that show what a lying hypocritical POS he is since he's here insisting he's not (which is HILARIOUS).
I started to look back through some of the run-ins and the first one I encountered is probably good enough to demonstrate it.
I made a post commenting on several people thinking it was out-of-bounds to assume the worst as far as Trump's involvement with Epstein. I linked to several bits of evidence demonstrating why it was perfectly in line with Trump's history.
Here was housenut's response:
Wow, he really got me! I made an assertion without evidence and he called me out on it!
Except here was the post he quoted without all the evidence that I included. He snipped it out of the quote, then added his little LOL at me not including evidence.
This is the kind of dishonest Fhead you are dealing with.
It's better to quote the post so people can go back to it and look at context. Maybe you're right, I'm not sure, but just posting images is kinda weird.
There also seems to be a divide here. coordi thinks claims/posts lacking evidence are completely fine.
I'm off to America now. Peace out.
Sure, here you go, fhead.
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...
This way you can see how I called you out for it immediately after and you spent post after post deflecting and mud-slinging instead of owning up to it.
It doesn't matter. We can only assume that person A means exactly what they said. It's far easier this way and avoids all of the problems that come from putting words in their mouth.
Why do we have to make that assumption?
Imagine that you are pipefitter in 1962 and you are pushing for a change in union leadership. One day at work, a known gangster comes up to you and says, "I knew a guy a few years ago who was pushing for changes at the union. His house burned down. Maybe you heard about that."
Would you simply assume that he was relaying a curious anecdote, or would you maybe read between the lines a bit?
So that they can continue to post dishonestly, of course.
Maybe you guys can keep track of the things you say yourselves so I don't have to find a post from 18 months and 2500 posts ago to prove what you yourselves saidRickroll and Geezer, two of the guys with the most noted distorted senses of reality, want to constantly attack me for holding them to their own wordsRickroll, how about Doorbread having a point because you recently wel
wtf are you talking about? i've never welched on anything?
are you talking about db wanting to wager money on it and me saying "that's dumb because it's subjective and i'm sure we could never agree"
i was the one who also dug up the thread in question and posted it and sure enough db thought he described it accurately whereas i felt he is in the looney bin
jfc wtf is wrong with you?
you should be unmodded just for that - that's about one of the worst things you can make up about anyone around here
at the very least you should take a break - absolutely mental you think that's appropriate
These sorts of disputes almost always start with some statement or question that is dripping with innuendo. Person A says something like the following:"This is a public service announcement that another Somali was arrested for fraud in Minneapolis."or "Can we all admit that it is reckless to yell insults at an ICE agent, no matter what you think immigration policy should be?"
i don't think you framed this properly at all
the people were saying don't drive your vehicle with a federal agent standing in front of it
even though i have that perspective, i still think the agent should be charged with murder
likewise, that other guy was clearly murdered
just because someone made terrible decisions to show up armed and interfere with federal agents doesn't excuse his murder
