The Tanoubliette: Pussy Hurt and Delusions or TTPHAD for short.
- Thread starter hodj
- Start date
- Status
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
I guess you missed the part where DickTrickle also acknowledged that I never said what you claimed I said. You (against all reason) put all your eggs in that straw man basket, though, so I suppose we'll have to listen to you hee and haw about it for another couple of days.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
I didn't miss it. I don't care. If Dick doesn't understand the Tanoomba Cycle by now, he's too retarded to care what he thinks about anything.
The Tanoomba cycle:
Tanoomba makes a stupid claim (Go live with a black family to better understand Trayvon/The Moon Landing was Faked/Electric Railroads will save humanity/Anita wasn't really talking about Hitman/Emma was really raped/etc)
Tanoomba gets called out on it
Tanoomba then spends the next decade trying to walk the comment back through a variety of appeals to fallacies, outright mental breakdowns, etc. The full litany of nonsensicalities we've seen the past three days here with you.
So again.
Evidence to justify your claim, or an admission you were wrong.
You can't walk it back. You don't get to "clarify" it any further. You're done. You've been found guilty of the crime of making shit up, and you have been sentenced to having lost this discussion as a result.
Period.
The Tanoomba cycle:
Tanoomba makes a stupid claim (Go live with a black family to better understand Trayvon/The Moon Landing was Faked/Electric Railroads will save humanity/Anita wasn't really talking about Hitman/Emma was really raped/etc)
Tanoomba gets called out on it
Tanoomba then spends the next decade trying to walk the comment back through a variety of appeals to fallacies, outright mental breakdowns, etc. The full litany of nonsensicalities we've seen the past three days here with you.
So again.
Evidence to justify your claim, or an admission you were wrong.
You can't walk it back. You don't get to "clarify" it any further. You're done. You've been found guilty of the crime of making shit up, and you have been sentenced to having lost this discussion as a result.
Period.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
The only one of those claims I made was the Anita one, which I stand behind 100%. There was never any backtracking and I provided plenty of evidence. The rest of those are more straw men.
I have not been "found guilty" of anything. Your straw man, no matter how much bravaccio and arrogance you present it with, is still a straw man.
Period.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
It's evidence that your straw man is very specific to your snowflake interpretation (how convenient!).
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
Why the fuck would you need a poll? Just link my posts where I make those claims. That's how hard evidence works, right?
Go ahead.
Pussy.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
Your claim: These are just special snowflake interpretations.
If the majority agree with my interpretations, then it isn't special snowflake, is it? Its pretty clear at that point that you have an issue communicating, not that we have an issue comprehending.
Retard.
So again
Evidence, or admit you're incorrect.
These are your only paths forwards here.
If the majority agree with my interpretations, then it isn't special snowflake, is it? Its pretty clear at that point that you have an issue communicating, not that we have an issue comprehending.
Retard.
So again
Evidence, or admit you're incorrect.
These are your only paths forwards here.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
No, not "these" interpretations. I'm specifically talking about your straw man du jour. It's very much a snowflake interpretation designed to save face. It's not working. You have yet to have even one person agree with that straw man, let alone "the majority".
If you think I made a claim, you should be able to link me making that claim. You know, like I've done with you? That would count as hard evidence, which is not subject to interpretation (unlike the popularity contest polls you keep suggesting). The fact of the matter is you can't link those claims because you already know my actual words do not reflect your straw men. You could very easily prove me wrong if the case was otherwise.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
I did, dude. I gave you three examples of exactly what I was talking about. What "evidence" are you waiting for?
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
How are examples of what I'm talking about not sufficient evidence for the claim I am actually making?
My claim: "Lawyers gonna lawyer"
Jhodi's reaction: "WHAT? Give me proof that evidence has been tampered with, NOW!"
Me: "Huh?, here are another couple of examples of lawyers lawyering, which, you know, was my actual very clear claim."
Jhodi: "Evidence the messages were tampered with or admit you were wrong!"
Me: "Wh...what? I never said that-"
Jhodi: "NOT LISTENING LA LA LA LA LA"
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
- Status