Search results

Oh, sorry, I didn't realize someone who regularly writes 3000 word posts was too lazy to read something that made him look like an idiot. TLDR: Since there will ALWAYS be people stupid enough to believe ANYTHING, the very concept of Poe's Law as you present it is completely meaningless. If...

Stop being a sarcastic cunt for two fucking seconds and let's have a conversation here. The definition you just quoted, can we consider that the official definition of Poe's Law? Assuming we can, how do we decide what a "clear indicator of the author's intent" is? When I readonly the...

So what's your definition? Again, I interpreted the Wikipedia definition to accommodate YOU and it wasn't good enough. Tell me how you think I should interpret Poe's Law and we'll work from there. Don't tell me what it's NOT, tell me what it IS. Ball's in your court, bro.

What part of "clarify" don't you understand? I was making sure everyone understood I was going by YOUR definition of Poe's Law when I admitted YOU WERE RIGHT. I'm not the one redefining when I'm going by YOUR definition. But you know what? Fuck it (again). Go ahead and tell me where YOU draw...

Dude, what the actual fuck??? I'm not redefining shit here! I'm merely clarifying the definition that YOU are going by!MYoriginal understanding of Poe's Law allowed for reasonable, rational people to be taken by satire.YOUwent out of your way to point out that if somebody is naive and/or...

^^^^

Correction: You were right, Hodj, youarea moron. Let me clarify: Poe's Law, revised for the official Rerolled dictionary: "No matter how obvious or ridiculous satire may be, somebody somewhere will be dumb enough to believe it's for real." See? Let it not be said that I don't learn...

Actually, you know what? It may be time for me to admit that I'm wrong again. I was ready to argue that Poe's law is about extremism and not about gullibility, that if you need to be a moron to not see something as the obvious parody it is, then it's not Poe's law. See, I always interpreted...

Lazy house pets requiring home renovations to reduce physical exertion Is this for real? I mean, I know pets can be lazy (especially cats), but how could we have come this far? Don't owners care about the health and well-being of their pets any more? This is disturbing. I just hope this is...

Good. Keep going with your circular logic and giant ego. I look forward to the next time you'll spend 6 pages in the Amod thread bitching and whining about how unfair it is that a mod called you out on your terrible, terrible shitposting. Have a good night.

Evans: Is Facebook making us gullible? Here are a few choice quotes: Clearly, this phenomenon isn't restricted to Facebook.

It's not "my side", you fucking ignorant moron. Do you have to respond to every single post I make with pointless drivel? Tone deaf, indeed.

Fucking really, dude? Again: This is so far from anything any real person would ever say under any circumstances that if you actually believe this is how SJWs talk (and behave), you should pull yourself out of the conversation completely because you're clearly too stupid to have any kind of...

Yes, Hodj, I understand what Poe's law is. The whole point is that the article in question is BLATANT and OBVIOUS "satire". It isin no way"indistinguishable from sincere expressions of the parodied views." ... Unless you're either a gullible moron or youwantto believe people are like that (so...

This is not Poe's law. This is people actively making themselves dumber by assuming other people are even dumber. "OMG, do people reallybelievethat? How absolutelyawful!!" FFS, guys, it's called critical thinking. Stop feeding the fucking trolls.

Jesus Christ, the only thing that's scary is how fucking gullible people are.

1987: "Tanoomba, if I self identify as someone who thinks you're wrong, what happens? Is that like dividing by zero?" Not sure what you mean, friend. You're more than welcome to think I'm wrong. I even highly encourage you to try to explain what it is you think I'm wrong about. I promise to...

It was not without its charm.

Chaos: "If what she says doesn't matter then why in the world do you devote hundreds of pages and man hours to debating the minutiae of what she says? You ar a confusing fucking dude." What's confusing? I have never been anything less than completely up front about my arguments and my...

She hasn't given me shit. It's the anti-Sarkeesies that have given me something worth arguing about.

AngryGerbil: "Tan you admitted last year that you gave her money. Don't act like you don't care." I did no such thing. In fact, I've already clarified that I only heard of her after her first Tropes Vs Women in Video Games video was released. I don't know where you think you read otherwise...

Chaos: "I apologize bro, I am not being clear. If it is all feelsdata and opinion, can't be quantified, there's no real studies to back up any of this, then why care about it at all? The definitions of the words she uses in her glorified YouTube rant don't really matter if all of this is for...

I see what you're doing there! I see it!

Thanks for stopping by, Erronius.

Chaos: "Bro, again, if you are saying that her statements can't be quantified and there isn't peer-reviewed research then wtf are we debating? Feelsdata? Come on." I've generally been arguing (like, since Sark was first mentioned) that claims made to support the "liar, fraud and con artist"...

OK, I really, truly thought this was pretty funny: 6 People Who Are Ruining Online Gaming http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-people-who-are-ruining-online-gaming/ There's nothing SJW about it, I swear!

Quaid: "myeah fisticuffs you say?? myeah myeaeaeaeaeah" Wow, that's so weird. Your avatar looks like what a hatless Vinnie from Awesomenauts might look like, and he totally does that voice. So nobody here liked Awesomenauts?