The Tanoubliette: Pussy Hurt and Delusions or TTPHAD for short.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
hodj_sl said:
Didn't read.

Imma go play Stellaris since I'm bored of Fallout.

You let me know when you've reread the debate, figured out why you're wrong, and have decided to either fix the fundamental flaw in your argument, or admit you were wrong like an adult.
Click to expand...
Sure, bro. I'll get back to you as soon as you can tell me what I'm wrong about. I honestly don't know what you think my argument is. I've clarified my position yet again and gotten "Didn't read", so all I'm hearing is you repeating delusional and desperate false narratives that you refuse to back up with anything.

Classic Jhodi.
 
lurkingdirk

lurkingdirk

AssHat Taint
<Medals Crew>
51,269
249,953
Last word.

MvQpqk5.gif
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
I like how he thinks asking for us to explain to him why hes wrong, when we just spent fourty pages doing just that, is some sort of rebuttal.

Its not.

Either reformuoate or admit you were wrong.

These are your only options.

Demanding we re explain to you why youre wrong is just begging us to let you play the stupid "restart the same debate everyday for months" game you like to llay.

Not happening chucklefuck. Your options are clear. Pick one or fuck off.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
hodj_sl said:
I like how he thinks asking for us to explain to him why hes wrong, when we just spent fourty pages doing just that, is some sort of rebuttal
Click to expand...
No, you just spent forty pages explaining how something I've never said is wrong.

I explained my stance yet again to you. If you can't tell me how any of it is wrong, we're done. If you can't tell me what you think it is I'm wrong about, we're done.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
No, you just spent fourty pages denying burden of proof in a textbook case while we all laughed at you.

Then, to top it off, you declared you were misrepresented, and now you're begging me to re-explain to you why you're wrong, as if we didn't just spend 40 pages doing that.

Its pathetic and sad. You're drooling on yourself, you retard.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
hodj_sl said:
No, you just spent fourty pages denying burden of proof in a textbook case while we all laughed at you.
Click to expand...
I did no such thing and, as usual, you can't back up this statement with anything other than hollow rhetoric.


Here:
Tanoomba_sl said:
- We DON'T KNOW whether Sulkowicz was raped.
- There is no hard evidence that proves Sulkowicz was raped.
- There is no hard evidence that proves Solkowicz was lying.
- There is reasonable doubt she might have lied, and reasonable doubt she was telling the truth.
- I personally believe there's a decent chance she's telling the truth. That's a personal opinion and requires no proof beyond listing several reasons why I am inclined to have those beliefs, which I did.
- I never claimed Sulkoqicz was raped.
Click to expand...
What part of that is wrong?
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Jhodi, I can't be any clearer with you.

I have stated and re-stated my actual stance many times over. What problem do you have with it? What do you want me to reformulate? I'm legitimately asking here.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
Tanoomba_sl said:
What part of that is wrong?
Click to expand...
See this?

Every time you do it, what you're actually doing is attempting to deny the past 40 plus pages where it has been explained to you in detail.

This is what Khalid was talking about when he said you wake up every day, and attempt to restart the debate you lost the day before all over again.

I know it is frustrating for you that no one is playing along, but, well. We're not.

Its a stupid game and the best solution is to not play it, so we're not.

If you are having trouble comprehending what has been said to you, which is pretty sad if it is the case since you're supposed to be an EDUCATOR IN THE FIELD OF COMPREHENDING AND UNDERSTANDING THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, well too fucking bad. You're not going to get to rehash it all again.

You can reread the thread, or you can reformulate your argument, or you can admit defeat.

These are your options.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
hodj_sl said:
See this?

Every time you do it, what you're actually doing is attempting to deny the past 40 plus pages where it has been explained to you in detail.
Click to expand...
No, Jhodi, what I'm attempting to do is communicate what my actual stance is and has always been., since you seem to have tremendous difficulty grasping it This is backed up by every post I have made on this subject. I have never shifted goal posts or pretended I didn't say something that I did. This is my stance, Jhodi. What's your problem with it?
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
No one cares what you think you're attempting to do because the only things you should be doing, not attempting to do, is re-read the thread until you get why you're wrong, admit you are wrong, or reformulate your argument so that it is syllogistically valid.

Until then, you're just a fart in the internet wind.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Here's what happened in this thread:

You made a false claim as to what my stance was.

For the third day in a row, I'm still pointing this out to you. It has yet to get through your remarkably thick skull.

But it's OK. All you have to do is tell me whatever it is you think I'm wrong about. It's not a trick question. In the interest of honest discussion, tell me what part of my stance you have a problem with and I will gladly address your concerns.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Here's my stance again, same as it ever was, broken down into handy bite-size morsels:

- We DON'T KNOW whether Sulkowicz was raped.
- There is no hard evidence that proves Sulkowicz was raped.
- There is no hard evidence that proves Solkowicz was lying.
- There is reasonable doubt she might have lied, and reasonable doubt she was telling the truth.
- I personally believe there's a decent chance she's telling the truth. That's a personal opinion and requires no proof beyond listing several reasons why I am inclined to have those beliefs, which I did.
- I never claimed Sulkoqicz was raped.

What's the problem?
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
No matter how much you try to "clarify" or "revise history" or cry about "context", none of it matters.

Your argument is flawed at its core. No one has misunderstood it. The misunderstanding here is on your part. You think that it is impossible for a crowd of people to hear your glorious oratory, which you yourself have admitted you sit around masturbating to and rereading because you think its just so stellar, and then reject your message. You believe the only way that can happen is if you have been "misinterpreted" and that only if you "attempt to clarify" yourself ever more forcefully, that eventually your "misunderstood message" will sink in and be comprehended.

The mistake you are making is failing to grasp that we read your argument, we understand it, and we reject it, because it is stupid theistic style Creationist logic, this has been demonstrated, it is fundamentally flawed at its core premise. This cannot be "clarified" away.

Period.

Either re-read until you figure it out, reformulate so your argument is of a valid form, or admit defeat.

It is just that simple.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
hodj_sl said:
No matter how much you try to "clarify" or "revise history" or cry about "context", none of it matters.
Click to expand...
There's no revision of anything. That's what my stance has always been, and every post I've made on the topic backs that up.




hodj_sl said:
Your argument is flawed at its core. No one has misunderstood it.
Click to expand...
What part of my argument is flawed? I just showed it to you again, and it has never changed. There are no flaws I can see, every part of my stance is logistically sound and stands up to scrutiny.




hodj_sl said:
The mistake you are making is failing to grasp that we read your argument, we understand it, and we reject it, because it is stupid theistic style Creationist logic, this has been demonstrated, it is fundamentally flawed at its core premise.
Click to expand...
Obviously, this hasnotbeen demonstrated, since my stance is still standing there, reasonable as ever and perpetually unchallenged.

Tell you what HAS been demonstrated, though:
- That you made up my stance for me, without backing it up with anything I've actually said.
- That you refuse to acknowledge that you've done so, even after it has been proven.
- That you refuse to address myactualstance, which has never changed.
- That you've made up the rules for a silly anti-logic game in order to try to save face. (It's not working.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.