|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
 Posted - 03/21/2005 : 05:24:40 [Permalink]
|
Latin, I know it has been said before, but from your last post it is again very obvious that you desperately need to go back to an english course. Your failure to view sentences in context or understand the meaning of certain sentences baffles me.
Furthermore, what you could have said after dr. Mabuse's last post was "sorry if I offended you or your girlfriend, I wasn't aware and I shouldn't have done so." and then drop the subject. In stead, you go on again like the jerk you are. A little course on common courtesy probably wouldn't be lost on you either. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2005 : 06:02:07 [Permalink]
|
Tomk80, whats the story on that Dutch magazine latinijral keep metioning?
(Edited for grammar) |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
| Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 03/21/2005 06:10:09 |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2005 : 07:31:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Tomk80, whats the story on that Dutch magazine latinijral keep metioning?
(Edited for grammar)
I really have no idea. The title struck as not very dutch at all, but of course in the Netherlands that doesn't mean anything (we tend to not use dutch titles that often). I'll try to figure out.
edited to add: I put what I could find out about it in in the other thread. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
| Edited by - tomk80 on 03/21/2005 07:54:29 |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2005 : 08:32:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
Your reasons are invalid under your own parameters , like the invalid reason the administrators gave me for closing my threads.
Now…….start again…….if you want. I give to you another chance.
And don't ask for help to administrators I have proved their double speech.
You better ask your girlfriend for help and have a good time …..son
OK, this has gone on long enough.
You expressed your opinion. You are not under any putative rule here.
Irrelavant hand waving. As moderator on this board it is my duty to step forward and say something when I see continued rules violations.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER
1) The administrators were asked to moderate the thread for content. That you did not agree with the scope is irrelavant.
False.
Here is whatDr. Mabuse wrote in his OP : “I hereby state the rule for this thread: No hijacking will be allowed.
I ask the moderators to enforce this rule, and the SFN- members to abide by it.”
My responses to his OP didn't hijack the topic contained in his OP.
Dave deleted my replies in contradiction of what Dr.Mabuse clearly stated.
Even Dr. Mabuse confessed his mistake when I proved him wrong: “I wrote a few paragraphs that wasn't directly on-topic, but I figured they were close enough not to be off-topic. It's my own fault that I didn't define to Dave where to draw the line.”
I think we all understand that you do not agree with the level of help moderating in the aforementioned thread and you wouldn't know a valid arguement if it bit you on the aft end. Since you deal only in innuendo and insult, that you don't understand what providing evidence was does not surprise me.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER
2) You have proven nothing. "Double speech" is just your way of deflecting critique of your premises with personal attacks.
Read the above and see the double speech in Dave's action. It is just a single example. I have proved their double speech many times , that is why they ( KIL AND DAVE) are with fear to my topics.
Kil and Dave fear your topics. Oh, that is funny. I have read the above and seen no "double speech". I stand by my assessment of your arguementation style.
quote:
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
latinijral
Banned
197 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2005 : 22:34:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER.
Irrelavant hand waving. As moderator on this board it is my duty to step forward and say something when I see continued rules violations.
Nah, you are just focused on Latinijral. You just showed your double speech as Dave and KIL.
Your fear is evident.
Only Ricky had the balls to protest when DUDE hijacked my threads with his insults.Is he a moderator? Naah.
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER.
I think we all understand that you do not agree with the level of help moderating in the aforementioned thread and you wouldn't know a valid arguement if it bit you on the aft end. Since you deal only in innuendo and insult, that you don't understand what providing evidence was does not surprise me.
Under your perspective , this was my “innuendo and my insult” : to put the evidence of how I forced Dr. Mabuse to recognize his mistakes in his OP of his aforementioned thread: ““I wrote a few paragraphs that wasn't directly on-topic, but I figured they were close enough not to be off-topic. It's my own fault that I didn't define to Dave where to draw the line.”
Also my “innuendo” could be that DAVE deleted my reply to Dr. Mabuse ‘s OP . Right?
Kil and Dave fear your topics. Oh, that is funny.
Why are they locked? Funny right?
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER.
That, as is evidenced by Dr. Mabuse's reply to you, is bullshit. Dr. Mabuse made a flippant comment concerning an icon, since deleted for TOS violation, in a deroggatory manner. You have brought up this comment repeatedly in poor taste each time. As moderator here, I feel it is necessary to command you to cease and desist dicussion on the topic of significant others of members.
Why do you continue bringing it back? Read my previous post to Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER.
By the context of the statement, one which obviously escapes you, I have evaluated your conduct here and found that you fit the class. You use the TOS as asswipe, yet you cry oppression.
Nah , I just proved how you keep using those old debunkery tactics…already debunked. You used a fallacy and a hasty generalization.
When you wrote this : “Those who scream "oppression" the loudest on fora tend to be the biggest TOS violators. You are no exception to this rule. We have stated our reasons for closing your threads.”.
If you want to do your “job” without using your double speech , you should be aware of this kind of statements like the LAST one I received : “Latindouchebag, you are a fucking moron. Shut the fuck up already, crawl back under your rock, take your idiotic rantings and stick them where the sun don't shine.
Dave, Kil, I don't envy you the task of administrating with this jizbag latinwasrepeatedlydroppedonhishead trolling around here. I imagine its a lot like changing diapers, only not as pleasant.”
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4000&whichpage=14
quote:
O |
Father of the new skepticism
Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"! |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 00:45:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Only Ricky had the balls to protest when DUDE hijacked my threads with his insults.
I didn't actually hijack your thread. I just turned the topic to where you were already going with it before you did. To bad it pissed you off.
Get over yourself you pathetic little child.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 07:52:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER.
Irrelavant hand waving. As moderator on this board it is my duty to step forward and say something when I see continued rules violations.
Nah, you are just focused on Latinijral. You just showed your double speech as Dave and KIL.
Your fear is evident.
Only Ricky had the balls to protest when DUDE hijacked my threads with his insults.Is he a moderator? Naah.
I've been married twice. I fear nothing. Least of all an insulting bully like you.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER.
I think we all understand that you do not agree with the level of help moderating in the aforementioned thread and you wouldn't know a valid arguement if it bit you on the aft end. Since you deal only in innuendo and insult, that you don't understand what providing evidence was does not surprise me.
Under your perspective , this was my “innuendo and my insult” : to put the evidence of how I forced Dr. Mabuse to recognize his mistakes in his OP of his aforementioned thread: ““I wrote a few paragraphs that wasn't directly on-topic, but I figured they were close enough not to be off-topic. It's my own fault that I didn't define to Dave where to draw the line.”
Also my “innuendo” could be that DAVE deleted my reply to Dr. Mabuse ‘s OP . Right?
Kil and Dave fear your topics. Oh, that is funny.
Why are they locked? Funny right?
Answered in the last post of the threads. Do you need an English refresher course?
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER.
That, as is evidenced by Dr. Mabuse's reply to you, is bullshit. Dr. Mabuse made a flippant comment concerning an icon, since deleted for TOS violation, in a deroggatory manner. You have brought up this comment repeatedly in poor taste each time. As moderator here, I feel it is necessary to command you to cease and desist dicussion on the topic of significant others of members.
Why do you continue bringing it back? Read my previous post to Dr. Mabuse
I am clarifying which TOS violations you are currently being warned on. Your responses indicate that either you do not understand or merely do not want to obey the TOS. Have I made myself clear on this? Should I have someone translate it to Spanish? Portuguese? Swahili?
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by VALIANT DANCER.
By the context of the statement, one which obviously escapes you, I have evaluated your conduct here and found that you fit the class. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
| Edited by - Valiant Dancer on 03/22/2005 07:56:36 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 08:01:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
Under your perspective , this was my “innuendo and my insult” : to put the evidence of how I forced Dr. Mabuse to recognize his mistakes in his OP of his aforementioned thread: ““I wrote a few paragraphs that wasn't directly on-topic, but I figured they were close enough not to be off-topic. It's my own fault that I didn't define to Dave where to draw the line.”
Lies! You did not force me to do anything. I recognized by my own accord that I did a misjudgement, with no help from you.
quote:
Nah , I just proved how you keep using those old debunkery tactics…already debunked. You used a fallacy and a hasty generalization.
And furshur has shown "old debunkery tactics" as you think of them to be lies, and false. But you still harp it like a broken record.
quote:
I already answered on it. My replies were deleted.
If your answers had been on topic, they wouldn't have been deleted. None of us are afraid of what you have to say.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 08:30:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
"Dave, Kil, I don't envy you the task of administrating with this jizbag latinwasrepeatedlydroppedonhishead trolling around here. I imagine its a lot like changing diapers, only not as pleasant."
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4000&whichpage=14
For once, latinijral has a valid point.
Calling him Latindouchebag, latinwasrepeatedlydroppedonhishead, and similar stuff shouldn't be done, no matter how justified we think we are.
Speaking of which, it has been posited that latinijral is short for latin-is-james-randi-a-liar. Is this true?
If not, what does it stand for?
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 08:34:51 [Permalink]
|
I myself, am terrified that he might start to make sense and I shall have to check in at the local lunatic asylum.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
latinijral
Banned
197 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 20:15:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tomk80.
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
False.
Here is whatDr. Mabuse wrote in his OP : “I hereby state the rule for this thread: No hijacking will be allowed.
I ask the moderators to enforce this rule, and the SFN- members to abide by it.”
My responses to his OP didn't hijack the topic contained in his OP.
Dave deleted my replies in contradiction of what Dr.Mabuse clearly stated.
Even Dr. Mabuse confessed his mistake when I proved him wrong: “I wrote a few paragraphs that wasn't directly on-topic, but I figured they were close enough not to be off-topic. It's my own fault that I didn't define to Dave where to draw the line.”
At this point it should be obviously clear to you what the main topic of the thread is. As Dr. Mabuse stated himself, his comments were slightly off topic. Dave W. has chosen to moderate very strictly, more strictly then Dr. Mabuse imagined himself. You know the rules that are set, abide by them.
At this it point should be obviously clear to you that I did answer on Dr. Mabuse thread.
At this point it should be obviously clear that you are acting as a TRUE BELIEVER in Dave's action.
At this point it should be obviously clear that you are a TRUE BELIEVER that my posts and answers were deleted because they were off topic…………………….. just because your leader said so.
If you have evidence that they were off topic please let me know.Please don't put me just swear of your leader or the USUAL : “I trust Dave”.
If you want to know again the answers and be sure if I was on topic or not , you have two options :
1) Tell the leaders of your SFN cult to undelete my posts and to unlock my threads.
2) Start your own thread ( without any ridiculous double speech rule), put the questions again , and see if you get or not the answers.
Extra tips : Ask Cuneiformist why he exclaimed this : "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"!”
Go cry to the one who made the putative rule and to the one who deleted my answers.
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4062&whichpage=1
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4067&whichpage=1
Another old skepticism' debunkery tactic ……..debunked.
|
Father of the new skepticism
Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"! |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 20:22:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
If you have evidence that they were off topic please let me know.
They were nearly identical to your OP in this thread. It is clear that by telling Dr. Mabuse, "Read all the above and answer me before I get on topic," that you were admitting that your responses were entirely off-topic. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
latinijral
Banned
197 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 22:09:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
Under your perspective , this was my “innuendo and my insult” : to put the evidence of how I forced Dr. Mabuse to recognize his mistakes in his OP of his aforementioned thread: ““I wrote a few paragraphs that wasn't directly on-topic, but I figured they were close enough not to be off-topic. It's my own fault that I didn't define to Dave where to draw the line.”
Lies! You did not force me to do anything. I recognized by my own accord that I did a misjudgement, with no help from you.
Refresh your memory :
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4036&whichpage=9
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
I already answered on it. My replies were deleted.
If your answers had been on topic, they wouldn't have been deleted. None of us are afraid of what you have to say.
What you are stating is called BLIND FAITH.
That turns you on a TRUE BELIEVER.
How come you are so “sure”? I made six replies.
See now why your stupid rule killed yourself?
Another Old skepticism' debunkery TACTIC ……..debunked.
|
Father of the new skepticism
Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"! |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2005 : 22:59:28 [Permalink]
|
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4036&whichpage=9
That link will not do. Quote the passage where you think I say that it was thanks to you that you "forced me to recognize" any mistake. And explain exactly how you can come to this conclusion.
I stand by my statements:
"It's my own fault that I didn't define to Dave where to draw the line."
and
"I recognized by my own accord that I did a misjudgement, with no help from you."
quote:
How come you are so “sure”? I made six replies.
Because during the years Dave_W has been on Skeptic Friends Network he has proven himself trustworthy and of high ethical standard. I'm not a True Believer, I'm just trusting that Dave is performing as honestly as he always has.
quote:
See now why your stupid rule killed yourself?
No I don't. Why don't you elaborate on that.
Ok, just for fun I'm asking Dave to discontinue the moderation.
Prove to me that you can stay on topic.
In order to be on-topic, you may only answer and elaborate on the two questions:
What is the New Skepticism?
What qualifies you to be it's Father?
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
latinijral
Banned
197 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2005 : 21:17:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4036&whichpage=9
That link will not do. Quote the passage where you think I say that it was thanks to you that you "forced me to recognize" any mistake. And explain exactly how you can come to this conclusion.
I stand by my statements:
"It's my own fault that I didn't define to Dave where to draw the line."
and
"I recognized by my own accord that I did a misjudgement, with no help from you." .
At the same link :
You recognized it AFTER I explained this to you : my quote : “If you posted a link about Dude's nonsense , at the beginning of your OP , then I must assume that is relevant to the topic.
I began answering to your OP referring to your initial mistake.
I refered ALWAYS to YOUR topic.
You are even discussing here your OP with me.
But my reply was deleted.
If you asked help to the administrators , you should thought about that invalid action posted on the link and your biased opinion.”
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
quote:
How come you are so “sure”? I made six replies. .
Because during the years Dave_W has been on Skeptic Friends Network he has proven himself trustworthy and of high ethical standard. I'm not a True Believer, I'm just trusting that Dave is performing as honestly as he always has. .
If you go to a TRUE BELIEVER forum , be prepared to hear the same response you made.
Poor son. But now is LATINJRAL here to open your eyes.
You ALWAYS need to be a REAL skeptic , no matter what you think about your particular tastes and sentiments to your leaders.
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
quote:
See now why your stupid rule killed yourself?
No I don't. Why don't you elaborate on that.
Ok, just for fun I'm asking Dave to discontinue the moderation.
Prove to me that you can stay on topic.
As I said before I was always ON YOUR topic, even with your stupid rule.
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
In order to be on-topic, you may only answer and elaborate on the two questions:
What is the New Skepticism?
What qualifies you to be it's Father? .
My response you will see it there now that DAVE or KIL should back off..
Another Old skepticism' debunkery tactic ……..debunked.
|
Father of the new skepticism
Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"! |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
