|
|
|
Pachomius
BANNED
62 Posts |
 Posted - 12/28/2006 : 19:48:15 [Permalink]
|
Please forgive me, guys here, but I still cannot find the search link button in this page for example.
I am really a simpleton*; so if anyone will be so kind as to tell me, by drawing an imaginary line perpendicularly upward from the hypothetical center point of the screen in this present page where I am writing this post, then turning the line from that center point clockwise or counterclockwise, and show me where the search link button is located degrees from zero clockwise or counter-clockwise.
-------------------------------
I guess we can all agree that Buddhism is not compatible with skepticism, okay?
So now if you guys here, good people (and please, no insistence on evidence for my addressing you guys as good people, that is a style of addressing but I do believe you guys are good people just the same) will continue to demand that I produce evidence for my musing that skeptics, etc., are soft on Buddhism but not on other religions, which kind of evidence would you like to hear from me -- though I confess that I am not conversant with the gathering of evidence and their presentation.
What I remember from college in Law 101 is that evidence is of three kinds:
(1) documentary, (2) testimonial, and (3) material.
Now my opinion or suspicion or guess or musing is a general statement or sentence: Skeptics are soft on Buddhism.
Not that I am making a categorical affirmation that it is a fact, the above sentence, Skeptics are soft on Buddhism; but which kind of evidence would you good people here who exact evidence from me do you expect? documentary or testimonial or material -- I have to look up my college notes to see if I might be mistaken with my memory recall, on the kinds and number of evidence.
And then there is that course in logic and epistemology where I was introduced to how exactly a sentence is to be understood, and which later in life when I learned BASIC programming by myself -- but I did not go very far there, I realized that logic is like programming in computer writing.
Anyway, what kind of evidence would you like me to present, documentary or testimonial or material; and please not all three, just choose one. Why? because we are all here for a good time, not to work ourselves to exhaustion, in which case it's no longer fun but an ordeal.
No, I am not into forums for ordeals, but for fun.
Happy New Year! -- don't ask me for evidence about the new year being a happy one, that sentence is one of hope and expectation and in optimistic prospect, meaning I invite all of us here with me to indulge in that emotion peculiar to humans to see better things ahead and hope for them; if not for this emotion we would all be going about like zombies of abysmal depression.
Pachomius
*Simpleton is most probably the reason why you guys some that is are so exacerbated with me, because I ask a simple question but you read in it a declaration of war, a lie, etc., everything that you would not want to think of the wife and kids you love and cherish at home. Now, I am not a family member but we do have a community of sorts here, don't we? |
 |
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 12/28/2006 : 21:49:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pachomius...
But, good people here, good no matter you are getting all riled up with my words in the original OP or somewhere along the thread [. . .]
In the opening post you suggested that skeptics are prone to be soft on Buddhism. Your commentary ceased to be rhetorical or a simple expression of opinion when you went so far as to claim it a fact by saying... quote:
Well, that is interesting, and as a matter of fact I have seen many who are out and out against theism and religion in general take up Buddhism, saying that it is not contrary if not in consonance with secular atheistic philosophies, including scientific skepticism.
(Emphasis mine.) We aren't so much riled up, Gerardo, as we are insistent that you either back up your claim with evidence, or acknowledge that you are unable or unwilling to provide evidence. In ten pages of postings in this thread you have yet to do either.
quote:
[. . .] you are some of you that is disturbed that I made a reference to another message of mine in another forum of another website without telling people that I am the author of that other message referred to.
You are angered because you see in that incident some kind of dishonesty from my part, seemingly the way I may allow myself this musing also, namely, that you are unhappy owing to your perceived on my part some dishonesty.
As a matter of fact I do that regularly in other websites and forum, and this is the first time that I am accused of dishonesty when people realize that I was referring to my own writings elsewhere, and even in the same website. And often I even assume another name, like Aesop Jr., or the guy facing me in the mirror when I look into the mirror.
For me that is a literary device, speaking of oneself and referring to oneself in the third person.
Generally speaking, in these forums, when one makes reference to his own work, he will preface it with something to the effect of, "In another forum I posted this..." Your lack of admission that it was your own work, even after you were asked who that "someone" was, makes you appear dishonest. Now you claim to have simply been musing, or was it using a literary device? No matter, the fact that you can't settle on one explanation only adds to the notion that you were dishonest then and attempting a dodge now.
And I'd even entertain yet another possibility, that being you're simply not capable of expressing yourself effectively. But if you are being misunderstood by essentially all of us here, the onus is on you, Gerardo, to learn to write English in such a way that you make your meaning clear.
quote:
Right his moment I feel that I am like the elderly lady in the bus just casually saying out in an audible voice: "I dare say it's going to rain, the sky looks dark," and so many fellow passengers in the bus demand from her evidence, accuse her of lying, calling here all kinds of unsavory names -- and all she did was just to say out loud with the idea of picking up a social conversation of the most harmless kind and for filling up the otherwise empty verbal space in the bus.
I'm afraid your heart wrenching plea for sympathy falls on deaf ears this time. Yours was not a casual quip made to fellow passengers on a bus, Gerardo. You made a claim in your opening post, claimed it as a matter of fact. If the lady on the bus claimed as a matter of fact that it was bound to rain, her fellow passengers might well expect her to back that claim with evidence.
quote:
Please, lighten up everyone, this is the season of peace and good will -- someone will also find my statement that it is the season of peace and good will also a provocation that is not welcome to him -- again, why would people be like that, always seeing provocations when none is intended?
When would you consider the end of this season of peace and good will, Gerardo, so that we might once again call you dishonest when you act dishonest, and require you to provide evidence when you make a claim of fact? Or how about this, all your peace-and-good-will sympathy seeking aside, if you're not willing to take it like one of the the big kids, just stay on the little kids' playground.
And as to your question about what sort of evidence we might accept, that question has been answered. Any evidence at all would be a darn good start, far better than your sidestepping and avoiding the issue completely as you are. By continuing to ask, you aren't making any progress towards providing it, now are you? I'm with Dave, "More evidence that he isn't interested in anything anyone here might have to say."
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 12/28/2006 : 22:12:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pachomius
Please forgive me, guys here, but I still cannot find the search link button in this page for example.
In the "jump to" box, just below the bottom of the posts, on the right hand side, scroll down to "search page," and you'll get to this page.
Or, from the Forums Page, on the left hand side, between the "Menu" and the "Member Spotlight," you'll see a search box, also with an Advanced Search option. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 12/28/2006 : 22:25:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pachomius
...will continue to demand that I produce evidence for my musing that skeptics, etc., are soft on Buddhism but not on other religions, which kind of evidence would you like to hear from me -- though I confess that I am not conversant with the gathering of evidence and their presentation.
What I remember from college in Law 101 is that evidence is of three kinds:
(1) documentary, (2) testimonial, and (3) material.
Now your words here are evidence that you are not engaged in rational, scientific skepticism, since if you were you would be "conversant with the gathering of evidence and their presentation," and you would also understand that scientific (or skeptical) evidence isn't based on what you may or may not have remembered from Law 101. Science and the law differ dramatically in terms of what constitutes "evidence."quote:
Now my opinion or suspicion or guess or musing is a general statement or sentence: Skeptics are soft on Buddhism.
Not that I am making a categorical affirmation that it is a fact, the above sentence, Skeptics are soft on Buddhism;...
This is disingenuous at best.quote:
...but which kind of evidence would you good people here who exact evidence from me do you expect? documentary or testimonial or material -- I have to look up my college notes to see if I might be mistaken with my memory recall, on the kinds and number of evidence.
Why don't you try the scientific route? You've created a hypothesis, now develop a method whereby your hypothesis might be tested with some degree of accuracy. And then actually test it.quote:
*Simpleton is most probably the reason why you guys some that is are so exacerbated with me, because I ask a simple question but you read in it a declaration of war, a lie, etc., everything that you would not want to think of the wife and kids you love and cherish at home. Now, I am not a family member but we do have a community of sorts here, don't we?
You can delude yourself all you like, Pachomius, but nobody read a "declaration of war" into your original question. It's your poor behaviour and self-righteousness after asking a question which other people find annoying.
But here's an interesting question: is English a second language for you? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2006 : 11:54:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pachomius
Please forgive me, guys here, but I still cannot find the search link button in this page for example.
I am really a simpleton*; so if anyone will be so kind as to tell me, by drawing an imaginary line perpendicularly upward from the hypothetical center point of the screen in this present page where I am writing this post, then turning the line from that center point clockwise or counterclockwise, and show me where the search link button is located degrees from zero clockwise or counter-clockwise.
Click forums. Look in the middle left of page.
quote:
-------------------------------
I guess we can all agree that Buddhism is not compatible with skepticism, okay?
All irrational beliefs are incompatible with skepticism.
quote:
So now if you guys here, good people (and please, no insistence on evidence for my addressing you guys as good people, that is a style of addressing but I do believe you guys are good people just the same) will continue to demand that I produce evidence for my musing that skeptics, etc., are soft on Buddhism but not on other religions, which kind of evidence would you like to hear from me -- though I confess that I am not conversant with the gathering of evidence and their presentation.
Material. All ever wanted was any evidence. Whatever you think supports your claim is fine with me.
quote:
What I remember from college in Law 101 is that evidence is of three kinds:
(1) documentary, (2) testimonial, and (3) material.
Now my opinion or suspicion or guess or musing is a general statement or sentence: Skeptics are soft on Buddhism.
That is a statement. What is lacks is the words, "I think" or "My opinion is".
If I said, "The world is flat." That is not an opinion. If I said "My opinion is that the world is flat." It might be, but it is still erroneous. Personally, I think that one should strive to have evidence for all of the things that they believed, unless those things are abstract.
quote:
Not that I am making a categorical affirmation that it is a fact, the above sentence, Skeptics are soft on Buddhism; but which kind of evidence would you good people here who exact evidence from me do you expect? documentary or testimonial or material -- I have to look up my college notes to see if I might be mistaken with my memory recall, on the kinds and number of evidence.
If it is not a fact statement, unprovable, or you lack proof, then it is unnecessary to continue. You think skeptics are soft on Buddhism. I don't. I think that because I have no reason to believe that they are and, apparently, neither do you.
quote:
And then there is that course in logic and epistemology where I was introduced to how exactly a sentence is to be understood, and which later in life when I learned BASIC programming by myself -- but I did not go very far there, I realized that logic is like programming in computer writing.
Anyway, what kind of evidence would you like me to present, documentary or testimonial or material; and please not all three, just choose one. Why? because we are all here for a good time, not to work ourselves to exhaustion, in which case it's no longer fun but an ordeal.
No, I am not into forums for ordeals, but for fun.
I am into forums for learning and fun. Learning first. This is why I am a cut to the chase kind of guy. If you have a point, say it. Present evidence. Let the debate begin.
MK announcer:
Round One....fight!
quote:
Happy New Year! -- don't ask me for evidence about the new year being a happy one, that sentence is one of hope and expectation and in optimistic prospect, meaning I invite all of us here with me to indulge in that emotion peculiar to humans to see better things ahead and hope for them; if not for this emotion we would all be going about like zombies of abysmal depression.
Pachomius
*Simpleton is most probably the reason why you guys some that is are so exacerbated with me, because I ask a simple question but you read in it a declaration of war, a lie, etc., everything that you would not want to think of the wife and kids you love and cherish at home. Now, I am not a family member but we do have a community of sorts here, don't we?
Simple is not the problem. It is the lack of protocol. When one makes a claim, one must present evidence for that claim.
Edited: to fix the word right to left. I am dyslexic to the core.
Edited to fix formatting -- Boron10 |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
| Edited by - Boron10 on 12/29/2006 12:47:16 |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2006 : 12:07:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pachomius
.........for me it is a literary device.........
Pachomius
Your not telling a story here [Insert Alias Here]. You are talking to people. Being open and honest is the best policy not to infuriate the people you talk to. In a normal conversation, would you say, "He went to the store." instead of "I went to the store." and expect people to understand who your talking about. No weaseling will get you out, epecially since you are unrepentant. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2006 : 12:10:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
And look, Pachomius still refuses to engage in a discussion relevant to his own stated objectives in this thread.
More evidence that he isn't interested in anything anyone here might have to say.
He is loosing credibility by the millisecond. I don't know if he wants to continue to be part of this forum, but if so, he should know that unrepentant trolls are looked down upon. He is fast securing a place in those ranks. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Denwash
New Member
USA
18 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2006 : 16:57:25 [Permalink]
|
| I haven't posted here because I certainly don't know much about Buddhism. I can tell you that its practitioners kind of intimidate me. I just remember a series of pictures of this old guy in orange robes pouring gasoline on himself and lighting himself on fire... and then just sitting there... while he burned <SHUDDER> no running around yelling OWIE! OWIE! OWIE!. No look of pain on his face <Re-SHUDDER> .. Maybe I DO avoid the whole Buddhism thing. |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2006 : 18:26:02 [Permalink]
|
| There is crazy and then there is Buddhism. That guy was a crazy Buddhist, but certainly not a poster boy, tagline "Buddhism is on fire!". |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Pachomius
BANNED
62 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2006 : 20:22:37 [Permalink]
|
As a matter of fact, that is an idiom. Wait, I will check to see what are the possible meanings of the phrase, as a matter of fact.
quote:
matter-of-fact: Definition, Synonyms and Much More from Answers.com This idiom often occurs in the phrase as a matter of fact, as in As a ... Definition: realistic, unembellished Antonyms: emotional, imaginative, lively ...
www.answers.com/topic/matter-of-fact - 65k - Cached - Similar pages
The idiom is used casually to invite the listener to attend carefully to the speaker, not to take the speaker as joking or being flippant, etc. That is my take of the idiom, aside of course from the solemn serious scientific philosophical and what you will intention of the person using that idiom to communicate a fact which fact certainly again is all up to his perception and understanding of what makes a fact, a fact.
Is English a second language with me? What do you guys think? Try this excerpt and see whether it is from a guy whose English is a second language or it is also a first language, or it is the only language, or it is what we might call a mother tongue.
quote:
Such contradictory articulations of reality and desire - seen in racist stereotypes, statements, jokes, myths - are not caught in the doubtful circle of the return of the repressed. They are the effects of a disavowal that denies the differences of the other but produces in its stead forms of authority and multiple belief that alienate the assumptions of ‘civil' discourse. If, for a while, the ruse of desire is calculable for the uses Of discipline soon the repetition of guilt, justification, pseudo-scientific theories, superstition, spurious authorities, and classifications can be seen as the desperate effort to ‘normalize' formally the disturbance of a discourse of splitting that violates the rational, enlightened claims of its enunciatory modality. The ambivalence of colonial authority repeatedly turns from mimicry - a difference that is almost nothing but not quite - to menace - a difference that is almost total but not quite. And in that other scene of colonial power, where history turns to farce and presence to ‘a part' can be seen the twin figures of narcissism and paranoia that repeat furiously, uncontrollably.
If you or some of you guys here believe that I am a dishonest person and a troll or whatever, and deserve to be ousted from this most serious forum on science, reserved for great and most learned folks to engage in, resolving the utmost issues of life and the continuation of the race, then it is your privilege to communicate your concern to the powers that be here in this forum.
About my producing material evidence to support my opinion that "Skeptics are soft on Buddhism," I understand material evidence as like the smoking gun in the hand of a guy standing beside another guy dead on the floor with a bullet wound, and the bullet comes from the gun.
Do you think such an opinion or sentence, "Skeptics are soft on Buddhism," is susceptible to material evidence?
I said twice already unless I am mistaken and I am loathe to produce evidence (and for being loathe to produce evidence I could be accused of dishonesty and called a liar, well that is the risk of joining a forum like the present one..., may I just the same utter softly: hehehe?) that this is the season of peace and good will, and I will say it again, this is the traditional season of peace and good will, and I wish you all a Happy New Year.
If you will not accept this expression of an aspiration, sharing from me, it's your privilege, and al |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2006 : 20:37:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pachomius
Is English a second language with me? What do you guys think?
I think it was an honest question and a sincere attempt to understand you better, Pachomius, which you have utterly rejected.quote:
Try this excerpt and see whether it is from a guy whose English is a second language or it is also a first language, or it is the only language, or it is what we might call a mother tongue.quote:
Such contradictory articulations of reality and desire - seen in racist stereotypes, statements, jokes, myths - are not caught in the doubtful circle of the return of the repressed. They are the effects of a disavowal that denies the differences of the other but produces in its stead forms of authority and multiple belief that alienate the assumptions of ‘civil' discourse. If, for a while, the ruse of desire is calculable for the uses Of discipline soon the repetition of guilt, justification, pseudo-scientific theories, superstition, spurious authorities, and classifications can be seen as the desperate effort to ‘normalize' formally the disturbance of a discourse of splitting that violates the rational, enlightened claims of its enunciatory modality. The ambivalence of colonial authority repeatedly turns from mimicry - a difference that is almost nothing but not quite - to menace - a difference that is almost total but not quite. And in that other scene of colonial power, where history turns to farce and presence to ‘a part' can be seen the twin figures of narcissism and paranoia that repeat furiously, uncontrollably.
Well, if Bhabha is who you're going to offer by way of comparison, then I agree that one can be a professor of English and still be incomprehensible.
But that's exactly why I asked about you, Pachomius. Per your refusal to answer my question, it seems as though you'd prefer we not communicate effectively, thus adding more evidence that you don't give a hoot about engaging in an actual discussion of the subjects you bring up.quote:
I think seriously that I will limit my messages here to the humor department.
Shall I move all of your threads to the Humor folder right now? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2006 : 21:30:47 [Permalink]
|
True to form, Gerardo, you spewed another obvious dodge or two, tossed in a couple more clear inferences that skeptics somehow treat Buddhism leniently, and followed that with a flat out refusal to develop any support for that opinion or to back your claim with evidence. You made a few feeble attempts at taking some jabs, gave another demonstration of your inability to provide a straight answer to a simple question, whined a little more about poor little persecuted you, and showed again your deplorable lack of willingness to be involved in an actual multidirectional, participatory discussion. And you peppered it all with some condescending, smart assed sarcasm. You don't honestly wonder why your comments aren't well received here, do you? Whether by intent or otherwise, you are acting like a quintessential troll.
quote:
Originally posted by Pachomius...
I think seriously that I will limit my messages here to the humor department.
That might be a good idea, since you certainly can't expect to be taken seriously about anything you've said here so far. Pathetically, yes, but not seriously. Then again, I'm not sure anyone would consider anything you've said particularly funny either. Come to think of it, there just may not be any appropriate category in these forums for you, Gerardo.
|
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2006 : 14:40:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pachomius
As a matter of fact, that is an idiom. Wait, I will check to see what are the possible meanings of the phrase, as a matter of fact.
quote:
matter-of-fact: Definition, Synonyms and Much More from Answers.com This idiom often occurs in the phrase as a matter of fact, as in As a ... Definition: realistic, unembellished Antonyms: emotional, imaginative, lively ...
www.answers.com/topic/matter-of-fact - 65k - Cached - Similar pages
The idiom is used casually to invite the listener to attend carefully to the speaker, not to take the speaker as joking or being flippant, etc. That is my take of the idiom, aside of course from the solemn serious scientific philosophical and what you will intention of the person using that idiom to communicate a fact which fact certainly again is all up to his perception and understanding of what makes a fact, a fact.
Is English a second language with me? What do you guys think? Try this excerpt and see whether it is from a guy whose English is a second language or it is also a first language, or it is the only language, or it is what we might call a mother tongue.
quote:
Such contradictory articulations of reality and desire - seen in racist stereotypes, statements, jokes, myths - are not caught in the doubtful circle of the return of the repressed. They are the effects of a disavowal that denies the differences of the other but produces in its stead forms of authority and multiple belief that alienate the assumptions of ‘civil' discourse. If, for a while, the ruse of desire is calculable for the uses Of discipline soon the repetition of guilt, justification, pseudo-scientific theories, superstition, spurious authorities, and classifications can be seen as the desperate effort to ‘normalize' formally the disturbance of a discourse of splitting that violates the rational, enlightened claims of its enunciatory modality. The ambivalence of colonial authority repeatedly turns from mimicry - a difference that is almost nothing but not quite - to menace - a difference that is almost total but not quite. And in that other scene of colonial power, where history turns to farce and presence to ‘a part' can be seen the twin figures of narcissism and paranoia that repeat furiously, uncontrollably.
So then are you gloating about your ability to use uneccesary jargon? The question was asked because you seem unrepentent in use of unclear phrasing. You also seem unable to recognize your responsibility to clarify what you state to the listeners. I am reminded of the Red Bull comercial in which the scientist uses tone if unecessary language to describe how Red Bull increases energy. In reality a good speaker is capable of making the listener understand, and is not a good speaker because he has a large vocabulary.
Most of what was cited is unecessarily over complicated and in some cases inaccurately used. I care not to discuss because I am the last person to be called a grammar nazi.
The point was that maybe you had an excuse for being so dense toward others, but apparently you do not.
quote:
If you or some of you guys here believe that I am a dishonest person and a troll or whatever, and deserve to be ousted from this most serious forum on science, reserv |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Pachomius
BANNED
62 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2006 : 17:36:48 [Permalink]
|
End of the year award for Neurosis: most productive in this thread award; congratulations!
Pachomius |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2006 : 18:29:34 [Permalink]
|
So after all these pages of dodging, sidestepping, and refusing to actually participate in a discussion which he initiated, it will come as no surprise to anyone who has been even loosely following, Gerardo admits to being a troll.
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
