Search results

This is also how I see it. Only saw the last few minutes of Spy and it looked pretty dumb. Having said that, Bridesmaids was very funny and so was The Heat. Is it critics' agendas or just a perception of their agendas? Seems to me audience reviews are far more susceptible to agenda-pushing...

Let me know when you're ready to prove your claim. You know, the claimI already have provenis a straw man. In the meantime:

Look, I broke him.

So sticking your fingers in your ears singing lalalalala it is, then. Can't blame me for not trying. I've been doing everything in my power to get you to engage in actual discussion, yet you stubbornly refuse. Everybody knows it (at least, everybody who has bothered to comment on it)...

Either he's trolling, he's truly lost his mind, or (the most likely scenario) he's already invested so much into his straw man that his colossal ego simply will not allow him to back down and accept the facts (which is, incidentally, one of Jhodi's most prevalent traits).

Listen, Jhodi: You made a straw man.I have proven such. What don't you understand about this? Explain your confusion and I will happily fill in whatever blanks you may have.

There was never an initial litigation to re-litigate. I haveproven such.Seriously, what don't you understand about this?

What part ofmy proofare you not comprehending?

Oh, I understood every part. It's wrong.I have proven such.

The biggest problem with that "Men aren't funny" article is that, by all appearances, his Ghostbusters movie seems to indulge (if not rely on) exactly the type of low-brow humor he's lambasting.

How ispointing out your straw man"re-setting the conversation"? Serious question.

Awww.... FUCK. I broke my streak.

Again.I never made that claim. The Hodj cycle: 1 - Make up a ridiculous straw man that in no way reflects his opponent's stance. 2 - Back up that straw man with nothing. 3 - Ignore any and all evidence that proves he made up the straw man. 4 - Insist that evidence be provided for the...

Ah, the "Creationist" schtick again. Quick check: Is he basing this claim on my actual words? ...No? Well, allow me to retort: Jhodi claims a creationist is someone for whom no amount of evidence will sway them from their beliefs. He has found exactly zero cases where I demonstrated this...

How Jhodi attempts to portray my claims: This is basically just his word. Nothing needs to be addressed here because it is backed up by nothing. How I portray Jhodi's claims: See the difference? If Jhodi has a problem with how I portrayed his claims, he is welcome to try to defendhis own...

Actually, what it comes down to is exactly what it always was: I refuse to accept your straw man of my argument. Again: I haveprovenyour claim is a straw man. Can you counter that? No. Well, then...

Nope, those are all your straw men, with the exception of the Anita one, which I stand behind. You know how we KNOW they're straw men? Because you can't, you literally CAN'T link to me making those claims. You can't link it because I never made those claims. If I had made those claims, you...

Here's the key, Jhodi: That claim you insist I made?I never made it. Therefore, YOU are now making a claim. YOU are claiming that I said "these texts were substantially altered". YOU have provided no proof for this claim. I have providedplenty of proofthat it is a straw man. No amount of...

Umm, that's not a wish. That's an expression of your opinion. I am entirely OK with you thinking "Jhodi" is stupid.

Incidentally Jhodi, every point you attempted to make in that wall of text (which I DID read), every single one, has already been addressed in theproofyou refuse to acknowledge. This is why I literally have no choice but to declare victory. I tried REALLY HARD to allow you a rebuttal. You...

...He says, after a wall of text that ONCE AGAIN completely fails to acknowledge theproofhe was wrong. #justjhodithings

Well, as anyone (literallyanyone) can plainly see, I have given Jhodi ample opportunity to attempt to countermy proofof his straw man. He has shown nothing but contempt for hard evidence and has stubbornly refused to acknowledge it in any way. Incidentally, that contempt for hard evidence goes a...

I have proven you wrong. Do you have a rebuttal or not?

^

Really? You think THAT'S clear? And not the mountains of evidence that prove you based your entire argument (yourentire argument, mind you) on a giant straw man? Yet more rampant hypocrisy. I'm not even surprised any more.

Luckily, there is no further need of "walls of text" since everything that needed to be said was said righthere. You're wrong. It has been objectively proven, using hard evidence, well beyond the shadow of any reasonable doubt.

So, this is basically the "Hurr durr I was just trolling" post where you try to backtrack on your ridiculous straw man, right? Also, again with the "My unemployed card beats your paid vacation card" ploy? Seriously? Why would you want to highlight that?

Stop it. Context is the enemy of those who seek to be outraged.

Anybody who'd like to know what many critics think about a movie?

Yes. Yes she has.

You tell me... Am I wrong? A non sequitur doesn't count for much, bro.

I don't give remotely enough of a shit about pointless faux outrage to go looking for SJW-produced articles about Ghostbusters, but most of what I've seen linked here said "Those who hate the new Ghostbusters because it stars women are misogynist." ...Which is an apt statement. Maybe there...

...But enough about Rerolled.

Or you can check out one of those sites with hundreds of oldDOS games.

Well, I DID say I was going to wait for reviews, didn't I?

Those reviews are WAY better than I expected. I might actually end up checking this one out.

Best Shatner cover:

Because we don't know what's happening?