Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 81 to 91 of 91
  1. #81  
    Originally posted by ToolkiT
    Making people feel pissed of and enjoying that sounds a bit juvenile and sadistic to me.....
    That's because you're not a former pre-law major or a former psychology major. If you were, you'd realize that it was all very funny. I can't speak for Yorick really, but I think the only place that anyone was pissed was in Marty's mind.
    Can we all please stop, get it over with and act 'normal' again?
    I think you missed the part where Marty slipped and admitted it was a compulsion that he couldn't control. I think you'll have to stop him.

    edit: added incidental statement
    Last edited by Toby; 04/18/2002 at 07:40 AM.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  2. #82  
    Originally posted by mmendo1
    That may be what's bothering you now, but it certainly wasn't the root of this thread.
    Actually, it was the root of Yorick's comment to my interpretation.
    First of all, that was not the problem because if it was, Yorick and/or Toby would have brought it up a long time ago.
    As a matter of fact, they did. Yorick's original comment should have been enough to get the message across. Your own wacky internal issues are what inspired the interpretation that Yorick was complaining about scrolling. After a more subtle post continued to befuddle you, Toby again tried to clarify what Yorick might have been trying to get across to you:
    Since you seem to have some trouble with reading comprehension, I never complained about having to scroll (in fact, neither did Yorick). Did you ever consider that he might have been making that statement since some people may be reading this on a Treo at 9600 bps (it _is_ a Treo group after all)? Nah...you obviously don't seem to understand the concept of being concerned about others' well being.
    Now, if you can't tell that this was about common courtesy and a bit of consideration for others (note: _not_ myself _or_ Yorick), then you don't have _any_ room to complain about others' reading comprehension. Instead, you interpreted it thinking that you were 'getting to the geeks' and launched into another diatribe.
    I don't have to prove anything. Their constant responses to my posts are more than enough proof of my effect on them.
    The feeling's mutual, Pee Wee.
    "OK, enough, discussion closed! back to the topic.
    If you can't resist it and keep on this way I'll close the thread... "

    please do...
    You heard him, ToolkiT. He can't control himself.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  3. #83  
    Originally posted by mmendo1
    That may be what's bothering you now, but it certainly wasn't the root of this thread.
    So, if we go with that logic, you must not exist because I can't see you. Actually, that is rather how your presenting yourself. Nevermind.

    First of all, that was not the problem because if it was, Yorick and/or Toby would have brought it up a long time ago. Second, if you can't figure out what I was responding to in my post that started this thread, you need to learn basic reading comprhension.
    First off, they did. Secondly, I'm not the one that was unable to comprehend the underlying cause of complaint.

    And I don't really care that you don't give a "rat's ***" either. This thread was never about you.
    I never said it was about me. I was pointing out where the problem lay - citing examples. You obviously didn't comprehend that, either.

    It never surprises me, though, how geeks manage to rally around each other (and yes, I know, you don't give a "rat's ***"...).
    That's right. The geek world is out to get you.

    I don't have to prove anything. Their constant responses to my posts are more than enough proof of my effect on them.
    More evidence indicating your level of reading comprehension. You weren't so good in english, were you?

    please do...
    At this point, I'm inclined to agree.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  4. #84  
    "Add to that your lack of comprehension that I didn't necessarily support Yorick's initial stance (which you probably still don't understand), and we've got a recipe for your delusion of a case that never existed."

    Who do you really think your fooling? While you may not have necessarily come out and explicitly said you agree with Yorick, its quite obvious where you stand. So unless you're willing to come right out and say you don't agree with Yorick, don't even bother replying to this statement.

    "Nope, sorry. I haven't gotten onto this board from home since the mail server maintenance I did Sunday."

    So which one is it? "[Everytime I get on this board I'm paid for it]" or "[I wouldn't even say I spend a decent amount of my time on the job on message boards]"

    "If you say so, Pee Wee, [Napoleon], etc"

    I didn't, you did (see above). Is the argument you make when you don't have a valid point to make because that sure seems to be the case.

    "As a matter of fact, they did. Yorick's original comment should have been enough to get the message across. Your own wacky internal issues are what inspired the interpretation that Yorick was complaining about scrolling. After a more subtle post continued to befuddle you, Toby again tried to clarify what Yorick might have been trying to get across to you"

    No, no where did either Toby or Yorick offer the explanation that their problem with my use of quotations was not being able to figure out what I was responding to, that is the explanation offered by DR ("And the problem...was trying to figure out wtf you were responding to from that extra page). The only explanations offered by them was that Yorick was complaining due to the possibility that it would take the page longer to load on the Treo (probably the most ridiculous of them all) and therefore rude and that I was being wasteful (almost as ridiculous). The poster after my original comment follwed by Yorick's silence of the issue on his subsequent posts is what prompted my pursuance of the scrolling interpretation. Now that ****-richardson has offered an interpretation that seems suitable for your purposes (where you previously had none), don't try and steal his idea and make it seem like that is what you were trying to get across all along because it certainly wasn't.

    "I never said it was about me. I was pointing out where the problem lay - citing examples. You obviously didn't comprehend that, either. "

    The way you jumped in this thread as if it were a matter of life or death certainly coincides with an interest level associated as if it were about you. Ya, I've admitted as to taking pleasure in taking psychological advantage of internet geeks, seems like your problem is the inability to resist making yourself feel better about yourself by attempting to blast someone for something that you have no business in. The difference is, my problem is comical, yours is one of a very serious psychological nature.

    "That's right. The geek world is out to get you."

    You three certainly have done nothing to disprove just how much geeks come to each other's aid in time of need.

    "Now, if you can't tell that this was about common courtesy and a bit of consideration for others (note: _not_ myself _or_ Yorick), then you don't have _any_ room to complain about others' reading comprehension. Instead, you interpreted it thinking that you were 'getting to the geeks' and launched into another diatribe."

    That was merely a poor attempt by yourself to offer an alternative explanation to my scrolling theory when Yorick had failed to provide one himself.

    "More evidence indicating your level of reading comprehension. You weren't so good in english, were you? "

    Good enough to get into four pre-law programs...
  5. #85  
    Originally posted by mmendo1
    Who do you really think your fooling?
    Every person responding to this thread, apparently.

    Oh, I forgot -- we're all "geeks defending one another." Loser troll-boys fly alone.
  6. #86  
    "Every person responding to this thread, apparently."

    So you're telling me you believe Toby did not think my use of quotations inappropriate (because that's what your statement implies)? Its one or the other...

    "Oh, I forgot -- we're all "geeks defending one another."

    You offer no evidence to the contrary.
  7. #87  
    Originally posted by mmendo1
    Who do you really think your [sic] fooling?
    Certainly not someone who claims I have no life outside the internet while simultaneously managing to reply to multiple people at apparently any hour of the day.
    While you may not have necessarily come out and explicitly said you agree with Yorick, its quite obvious where you stand.
    Apparently not.
    So unless you're willing to come right out and say you don't agree with Yorick, don't even bother replying to this statement.
    You haven't even grasped Yorick's original statement yet. Until you do, don't even bother replying to this statement.
    So which one is it? "[Everytime I get on this board I'm paid for it]" or "[I wouldn't even say I spend a decent amount of my time on the job on message boards]"
    In fact, I never said the former, but my actual original statement and the latter are not mutually exclusive either. You simply have a skewed perspective on how much time I actually spend here (not that I can fathom why should care, but...).
    "If you say so, Pee Wee, [Napoleon], etc"

    I didn't, you did (see above).
    LOL...thanks for proving my assessment correct.
    Is the argument you make when you don't have a valid point to make because that sure seems to be the case.
    It was valid enough, evidently.
    No, no where did either Toby or Yorick offer the explanation that their problem with my use of quotations was not being able to figure out what I was responding to,
    It seems to have escaped your notice that _Toby_ never cared about your use of quotes.
    The only explanations offered by them was that Yorick was complaining due to the possibility that it would take the page longer to load on the Treo
    No, you're (notice the correct grammar) really befuddled now. Yorick never said that. I offered it as a possible explanation for his request for a bit of courtesy.
    (probably the most ridiculous of them all)
    Why exactly is it ridiculous? You don't think that people browse this site from their Treos?
    and therefore rude
    No, you're rude for many other reasons besides that.
    The poster after my original comment follwed by Yorick's silence of the issue on his subsequent posts is what prompted my pursuance of the scrolling interpretation.
    Which is where _your_ foolishness began. You took Yorick's silence as complicity when it could have just as easily been that he doesn't frequent the site as often as you believe.
    Now that ****-richardson has offered an interpretation that seems suitable for your purposes (where you previously had none), don't try and steal his idea and make it seem like that is what you were trying to get across all along because it certainly wasn't.
    No, Josh knows how to read.
    The way you jumped in this thread as if it were a matter of life or death
    ROFLMAO...you took that _seriously_? Geez...I think it's painfully obvious who needs to get a grip on reality.
    certainly coincides with an interest level associated as if it were about you. Ya, I've admitted as to taking pleasure in taking psychological advantage of internet geeks, seems like your problem is the inability to resist making yourself feel better about yourself by attempting to blast someone for something that you have no business in. The difference is, my problem is comical, yours is one of a very serious psychological nature.
    Yet more Pee Wee arguments. "I know you are, but what am I." "I know that you're a psycho and have no life outside the internet, but I'm here responding to several people just like you post for post." Take a step back from yourself, Marty, and reevaluate things.
    You three certainly have done nothing to disprove just how much geeks come to each other's aid in time of need.
    I can't believe you seriously wrote that. What _'need'_? While I was at home playing with my daughter and sleeping with my wife last night, you were _still_ here supposedly working on a school paper while arguing with total strangers.
    That was merely a poor attempt by yourself to offer an alternative explanation to my scrolling theory when Yorick had failed to provide one himself.
    No, that was an attempt to treat you like a sane human being. I see my mistake.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  8. #88  
    Originally posted by mmendo1
    So you're telling me you believe Toby did not think my use of quotations inappropriate (because that's what your statement implies)? Its [sic] one or the other...
    Toby doesn't care about your quotes. Toby's on aggregated T1s.
    You offer no evidence to the contrary.
    I have seen no credible evidence that you are even out of junior high yet. Newsflash: I don't know John from Adam. If he's telling you to get a grip, then maybe you should listen.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  9. #89  
    "Certainly not someone who claims I have no life outside the internet while simultaneously managing to reply to multiple people at apparently any hour of the day."

    I've already offered my explanation for that. Its obviously your choice to believe it or not.

    "In fact, I never said the former"

    Really? ("Rest assured that anytime you see me here, I'm getting paid for it) "

    "but my actual original statement and the latter are not mutually exclusive either. You simply have a skewed perspective on how much time I actually spend here (not that I can fathom why should care, but...)"

    How convenient is that? "[Oh by the way, my statements aren't mutually exclusive]" either.

    "It seems to have escaped your notice that _Toby_ never cared about your use of quotes."

    So then Toby is just an internet geek coming to the aid of another geek.

    "No, you're really befuddled now. Yorick never said that. I offered it as a possible explanation for his request for a bit of courtesy."

    I never said he did either. Re-read my post.

    "(notice the correct grammar)"

    Its an internet message board, not a doctoral thesis, get over it. I really don't give a "rat's ***" about the grammar/spelling I use on a message board because its just that, nothing more (at least to me).

    "Why exactly is it ridiculous? You don't think that people browse this site from their Treos?"

    "Did you have to quote the whole post [because now that you did, the page is going to take longer to load for people using a Treo] and that's just rude of you" That has to be one of the most ridiculous sounding statements I have ever heard, sorry you can't see that.

    "Which is where _your_ foolishness began. You took Yorick's silence as complicity when it could have just as easily been that he doesn't frequent the site as often as you believe."

    Again, as I've previously stated, Yorick had several opportunities to post a response in his subsequent posts. It is his lack of a response in the posts he did make that provide evidence to my stance.

    "ROFLMAO...you took that _seriously_? Geez...I think it's painfully obvious who needs to get a grip on reality."

    It sure is and it certainly isn't me. Anyone who believes that an explanation like being annoyed with improper use of quotes due to it adding 2 seconds and/or 30cents for a page to load on a Treo is the one who needs to get a grip on reality.

    "Yet more Pee Wee arguments. "I know you are, but what am I." "I know that you're a psycho and have no life outside the internet, but I'm here responding to several people just like you post for post."

    lol! Are you really trying to implicate yourself as a geek because if you are, it certainly is working.

    "I can't believe you seriously wrote that. What _'need'_?"

    The one supposedly created when I made my comment that spurred your initial response. I didn't think there was one myself as Yorick could have easily responded on his own but obviously you did otherwise you wouldn't have jumped in.

    "While I was at home playing with my daughter and sleeping with my wife last night, you were _still_ here supposedly working on a school paper while arguing with total strangers."

    I needed something to keep me amused through the night so I wouldn't fall asleep. Thanks to all who provided me with that amusement!
  10. #90  
    Originally posted by mmendo1
    I've already offered my explanation for that. Its obviously your choice to believe it or not.
    I'm thinking not.
    Really? ("Rest assured that anytime you see me here, I'm getting paid for it) "
    Yes, really. Those two statements are not identical. Go back to reading comprehension class.
    How convenient is that?
    It was evidently inconvenient for you since you presented them as a false dichotomy.
    So then Toby is just an internet geek coming to the aid of another geek.
    No, 'geekness' has nothing to do with it. Yorick was also not aided by anything I said. _You_ are the one who obviously needed help understanding what he (among others at this point) was trying to say.
    I never said he did either. Re-read my post.
    No need.
    Its an internet message board, not a doctoral thesis, get over it.
    I'm not under it.
    Again, as I've previously stated, Yorick had several opportunities to post a response in his subsequent posts. It is his lack of a response in the posts he did make that provide evidence to my stance.
    Only in your world. That would be the one where any response proves your stance as well as a nonresponse. How convenient.
    It sure is and it certainly isn't me.
    "I know you are but what am I" sums up nearly all of your posts. You'd save a lot of energy by just cutting and pasting it.
    lol! Are you really trying to implicate yourself as a geek because if you are, it certainly is working.
    I wasn't aware that being a 'geek' was a crime.
    The one supposedly created when I made my comment that spurred your initial response.
    No, you're losing context here. You claim that geeks were jumping to the need of another geek. Unless you're claiming to be a geek suddenly, no geek had a need.
    I didn't think there was one myself as Yorick could have easily responded on his own but obviously you did otherwise you wouldn't have jumped in.
    Yorick wasn't the one with the need there.
    I needed something to keep me amused through the night so I wouldn't fall asleep. Thanks to all who provided me with that amusement!
    How sad.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  11. #91  
    Since this is drifting further and further off topic and tends to become a bit of a flamewar I'm closing it...

    I you really feel like discussing this topic further (allthough to me it looked like it was going nowhere) open a new thread in off-topic...
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Posting Permissions