All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
Or how about Occam's razor: Maybe having the same exact conversation is not my idea of "getting somewhere." Why didn't that cross your mind?
Instead, it has to be some sort of "deep" psychoanalysis that results in my protecting my ego from the wrath of the internetz!
Guess what? I skimmed over about 70 pages (20 posts each) before I made a single post in this thread. That's what you should do before posting in a thread. Too big? Use the search feature.
No. I refuse to feed you fish. Can search back 20-30 pages and read through the thread?
Would you like to know what type of poster reposts the same argument already presented in a thread that has long been dead? Internet Trolls.
I could easily "save my ego" by quoting a post that would take you 30 seconds to find on your own. Guess why I won't. I'll be honest, I promise.
Your new found ideology perplexes me for one reason. You've used repeat arguments in the past. I provide examples at the end of this post. Why is it anathema to you now?
I commented on appearances. I explained consequences. I did not attempt psychoanalysis on you. I am not a psychoanalyst. I never said you want to protect your ego.
This point does not affect anything in our discussion.
Which is fine actually.
That is a possibility. It does not accurately reflect a full range of motives though.
What I find most interesting about this dadudemon, is that you had NO problem whatsoever reposting the same arguments in the past. Remember the discourse you and Robtard shared just a few pages ago? I found a few instances where you raised those same points.
The “Ali isn't as good as today's boxers” view you hold.
Here is your belief that Lee is faster than Ali.
You think Ali won't “connect” much with the elusive Lee.
You may wonder why I didn't search for the “proof” of Lee bench pressing trucks when I did this post. Simply put, I didn't make the claim that Lee is stronger; however, I did make the claim that you repeat arguments. Naturally, I provided evidence rather than saying “Go search for it yourself.”
tl;dr- dadudemon, it's absolutely fine if you don't want to repost the “proof”. Still, you must understand that your actions resemble dodging. Convincing anyone of a different motive is nigh-impossible; it's too convenient an excuse now, especially considering “find it yourself” is only a recently adopted position. If you don't extend reasonable consideration to your opposition, your participation here becomes meaningless.
Last edited by StyleTime on Jul 24th, 2010 at 08:21 PM
OH! OHHHH! OOOOHHHHHHHHH! OOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHH! OOOOOOOOOHHH MY GGGGGGGGAAAAAWWWWDDDDDDD! WHERE YOU AT?! WHERE YOU AT?! WOMBO COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMBBBOOOOOO!!!!!!
Lee wouldnt be able to get anything in on Ali without coming into range for devastating counterattacks, 'cause compared to Ali he is a midget.
And Im sure youre aware of the damage that such attacks can yield.
And 1967 Ali - the Ali who so mercilessly and one sidely destroyed Cleveland "Big cat" Williams in such spectacular style probably would beat all of today's heavyweights... Fights were longer back then, the rules more spit and sawdust, there wasn't any of this 8,000,000 different belts nonsense, so in order to be the best in the world you really DID have to be the best in the world.
You said it was likely that I feared a rebuttal. It was both a immature way of trying to pressure me into re-posting them by "daring" me and accusing me of trying to save my ego.
You can dress it up however you like but you can't edit a post you already made.
Actually, it does.
Here's what you're supposed to take from that: stop being lazy and read the thread.
That's right.
Whew. Glad I wasn't aiming for typing every last possible motive and instead, went with the most probable.
Heh heh heh.
More on this later.
So what have you proven?
Let's read on to find out.
Since my recent posts, themselves, already indicate that the arguments have been posted in the past, you've done nothing at all to prove anything that I already did not indicate.
In fact, you've wasted a lot of time to just miss the point entirely, haven't you?
So this gets to the "meat" of it. If it were "dodging" then why did I tell you to read the thread where they arguments had already been done? You can call it dodging all you want, but no "dodger" actually directs you to their exact arguments.
Pretty much, you ignored, entirely, what I told you my motives where and, instead, went on a psychoanalysis adventure.
Is it possible that my refusal to "point you to this evidence" and "arguments" is exactly the reason I said it was? Is it possible that there are additional pieces of information that you are missing?
OF COURSE!
Now why would I entertain Sadako and Robtard, just briefly, on points that were already covered in the post but NOT do it for you and RJ?
You are a newb.
RJ WILL argue in loops, which is a waste of his and my time. (more on this, in a sec)
Newbs should educate themselves before jumping in the middle of a discussion to avoid looking foolish (ie, rehashing arguments, unknowingly).
It could also be that I was talking to a couple of homies on KMC, Robtard and Sadako, because I know that they, for the most part, would avoid arguing in loops again. That and Robtard has a pretty damn good memory: lightly mentioning what we discussed in the past is more than enough for him and there's no reason for me to patronize him by elaborating. With RJ, it was more than enough to just direct him to the arguments/evidence. I don't know why he just didn't go read about it, just 10-20 pages back. He's certainly asked me to read 10-20 page threads to catch up and put my 2-cents in. That's really a mystery but I was not going to entertain his request.
We covered that, already, too.
We concluded that Ali could punch faster than Lee could kick and that Lee's kicking reach is faster than Ali's punching reach. You mentioned something about Ali kicking too and I mentioned his lack of kick training and Leo posted vids of actual Martial Artists kicking the shit out of each other and you and I agreed to disagree about Lee's kicking vs. Ali's punching.
Basically, it boils down to this: Can Ali block Lee's kicks and/or punches (folow-up punches, at that). If he can, then Lee will suffer the consequences of a follow-up knock-out punch from Ali. If he can't, Ali is knocked the **** out in a few seconds.
Now I'm going to go workout 'cause I like being stronger than both Ali and Lee. (It's leg day for those of you who actually took the time to read the thread...meaning...I am saying my legs are stronger. )
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Jul 25th, 2010 at 12:42 AM
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
dadudemon, frankly, you DO look very evasive and your posting attitude in here is akin to trolling and is actively hindering the thread. At this point, if you are not willing to restate your arguments for more recent comers to the thread then fine- but please stay out of the thread on that basis.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
It's NOT dodging as the arguments were ALREADY posted and debated just a few pages back. What THEY are doing is trolling.
On top of that, StyleTime (who actually is trolling) looked back a few pages and re-posted my arguments for everyone to see that I wasn't full of shit.
Like I said, "You can call it dodging all you want, but no 'dodger' actually directs you to their exact arguments."
Anytime someone says, "REPOST IT B*TCH, if you really made it! NYA NYA!" It's an automatic invitation to "no, look it up." Think about it: what is your response to someone that makes a thread that has already made a thread and they start whining when you close it? "Use the search feature." Why should it be any different for poster to poster? Why should I have to do his work for him? If he has something new to add to the thread, other than trolling, let him.
Read back a few pages, you'd see where he started trolling, right from the gate.
Odd that his first post in the thread is trolling?
And, no, new comers should read the damn thread before jumping into the middle of a thread. That's simple etiquette and common sense. It's rude and annoying to rehash old topics and complain that someone won't read the thread for them.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Jul 25th, 2010 at 04:29 PM
I did tell them how many to read back. (20-30 pages, at the most.)
And I disagree on your latter point, as well. Why should I read the damn thread for them when they are the ones wanting to know the arguments? I don't want to know them because I already know them.
No, I did not. I never commented on your ego. I never dared you to do anything. I pointed out an appearance. In fact, I've maintained that you don't have to reiterate anything; it is a point you even acknowledge.
It needs no editing, dadudemon. If you scrutinize my post, you'll find that my views aren't congruent with your somewhat twisted interpretation of them.
No, it does not. If I respond to this, our discusion proceeds on the same course. If I ignore it, our discussion proceeds on the same course. This issue does not affect anything. We should probably drop it.
You probably shouldn't have. Trolling actually seems like the least likely possibility really.
I proved exactly what I sought to prove. Despite your unwillingness to deign to our level now, you've recycled arguments in the past.
This makes little sense given your stance. You claim trolls repost arguments. I point out that you, in fact, repost arguments. You now change to the "no duh?" defense?
dadudemon, I haven't actually accused you of anything outside of the recycling issue. I highlight appearances and the futility of your stance. I thought my point may be lost somewhere, but others see it. Why can't you? Also, saying "search the thread" is no "pointing us exactly" to your arguments location.
This wasn't quite my question. This is what leads me to believe that you don't fully understand my point.
You are calling me names? Seriously? I thought better of you.
Don't single RJ out. You do it. I do it. Robtard does it. Sadako does it. I'll toss in Bardock42 just for the hell of it. He's probably done it too. It's rediculous to hold another standard simply because someone isn't one of your "homies."
You keep talking about Robtard's amazing memory, but he's repeated himself as well. Heck, he's hardly brought up points that haven't been addressed before at some point. Whirly, whether you like him or not, covered a fairly large portion of the pro- Ali and anti- Lee points a long time ago.
Sorry if my post feels brief, but there is little for great elaboration. As it stands now, my last tl;dr paragraph still holds.
Last edited by StyleTime on Jul 25th, 2010 at 05:54 PM
I'm not one to accuse people of trolling, in general; however, the topic is receiving fair push from dadudemon.
I will say this. dadudemon, you've openly admitted (to ME no less) that there is absolutely no way to prove Lee wins this fight. Once again, I'll back this claim up with evidence.
Which is more akin to trolling? You repeatedly posting arguments that you admit have no merit or me expressing frustration when someone does the aforementioned act.
I've already said this, but you're hindering progress. Not me.
Last edited by StyleTime on Jul 25th, 2010 at 06:00 PM
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
You don't have to you just shouldn't repeatedly say "read back, read back" if they are not going to read back and you don't want to refute it again, why not just leave it be?
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
Nothing you said actually addresses my point, here.
And, you're backtracking because I called you on your trolling bs (which I already called out, as well.)
Care to actually address the point?
Yes it does. Had you actually heeded the quite obvious advice, you would have your "answers" (answers that you are not actually looking for. You're just looking to argue with someone for the sole purpose of pontificating) and then you could bring up new points, if you so felt. Instead, you've been playing a childish pissing match game.
It's quite obvious that you have no interest in posting on topic and you're only purpose here is to troll.
Nah, it is actually what you are doing and you've more than proven that with your long-ass "rebuttal."
Incorrect. The only thing you've proven is that I am unwilling to repost the exact arguments made in the past, but, instead, loosely referred to them to posters I have had the conversation with. The actual meat of the arguments, including the "evidence" was not reposted.
I could just requote everything I just told you about that entire subject to save time.
No where did I repost arguments, though. I posted references to past arguments.
Despite your best efforts to troll and pick small pieces out of my posts, I have not reposted arguments, at all.
Care to actually repost the arguments and actually make a rebuttal because you've actually read them and you've proven it.
No, you miss the point entirely, misrepresent the past, and you don't actually address the topic.
And, yes, pointing you to the exact thread and indicating how many pages ago my arguments with evidence were made, is definitely pointing you exactly where it is. Sure, you'll have to actually do some reading to see both sides, but that was kind of the point of making you go back and read it and instead of letting you get away with trolling the thread.
Because you replied with anything beyond, "Oh, okay. I see.", it leads me to believe you didn't get my point. Yes, I'm serious.
No you didn't think better of me. And, no, it's not a "calling [you] names", either. You've been trolling this whole time so you are trying to get me to call you names. That's what trolls do. Sorry, ain't happening. You won't get a chance to report me as I learned my lesson with AC. It's your fault for assuming that newb was derogatory in it's context and I make no apologies for your interpretation. Any time I am new to a project or discussion, I always consider myself as the "newb" until I am up to snuff.
Here, why don't you educate yourself on what a newb is:
"Someone who is new to the activity that they are currently partaking in. Very often this term is used pertaining to computer games. Contrary to popular belief, a newb and a n00b are not the same thing, as a newb can and will get better where as a n00b will partake in activites meant mainly to aggrivate other players. "
or
"A term used to describe a inexperienced gamer/person/etc. Unlike a noob, a newb is someone who actually wants to get better."
RJ wasn't singled out. It was you and RJ. RJ is not a newb to the topic. And, no, Robtard, Sadako, and Bardock generally grow tired of arguing in loops, very quickly. As do I, which is why I end up requoting my posts back to RJ. RJ has huge patience and can arguing the same points over and over: I can't.
And, you really don't understand how "homies" work, at all. Of course I will hold them to different standards than a troll, such as yourself.
Yet again, you reveal more about you actually having read the thread, which furthers my point of your trolling.
It doesn't feel brief at all. It feels as though it misses many of my points while masquerading as "you missed my points" in addition to making dodges.
I will not respond to any of your trolling, anymore. Your reply will be ignored as you are definitely a troll, at this point.
If you don't have anything to add to the thread, don't post in it. If you wish to actually be on topic, quote a post, reply to it, or make a new post.
Absolutely.
Incorrect and, again, more trolling from you.
There's no way to prove the Ali beats Lee, either. That should have been easily understood. Of all the points you've made, this is the most lame.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Jul 25th, 2010 at 08:02 PM
You conflate fact and fiction. The fact is that I did not say those things. Fiction is your rendition of my statements.
Your point was never valid. I, in fact, did not say those things.
My stance remains unchanged.
You keep missing the fact that I didn't make the claim.
Had I no interest here, I would not post. Pointing out negative consequences of your actions is not trolling.
To the entirety of your post, I gave a fair consideration and a legitimate reply. How is that trolling?
Ha, I see what you did there. No, you did not literally click the quote button when you recycled arguments; still, that differs little from retyping the same points.
This is moot. I already showed you did.
I refuted those back then. That is actually why I was curious when you brought them back up recently. I asked that you specify certain points, because I don't remember any of them proving what you said. I needed to know which one in particular you meant.
Those are things you said.
No, you didn't. As simple as that sounds, it suffices here. 10-20 pages ago is not an exact location.
You accuse me of trying to journey into your psyche, and now you do the same to me.
Yes, I thought better of you. I do not remember you once calling me out of my name. I sincerely did not expect you to do it now.
More importantly, I see where some of this hostility comes from. I know not the nature of your relationship with Alpha Centauri, but I can assure you that I am not Alpha Centauri. I have been flamed and called names, yet I have reported a whopping zero people. Goading posters into flame wars is not my style, and you have no evidence whatsoever saying I'd suddenly do it now. If you are hurting because of something Alpha Centauri did, I offer my condolences.
I dropped the “newb” issue. It's irrelevant now.
You say that, but they've all done it. Honestly, Sadako has participated in this thread since page 2. He raises good points obviously, but he is bound to repeat himself in 145 pages.
I understand how it works. It's still ridiculous.
I ask for clarification here. Are you saying I have or have not read the thread?
I have dodged nothing. In fact, I've made a point of immediately backing up points which require it.
You are not obligated to entertain me or anyone else; however, you have little basis for calling me a troll.
Heh. We're dropping it, but you made sure to get in that last reply.
I didn't say anything wrong there. How is this trolling?
Only in the sense that they will never fight. As far as arguments are concerned, Ali wins due to real evidence.
TL;DR dadudemon, you're hiding a weak argument behind attempts to “out” me as a troll. If you want to drop this whole thing, no one is stopping you. Still, you must understand that this only makes it appear more like a dodge attempt. You mounted one last attack at me and withdrew swiftly; taunting me with accusations of trolling won't hide anything. Again, it is absolutely fine to stop now. Understand that you leave behind several implications that are difficult to defend.
Last edited by StyleTime on Jul 25th, 2010 at 09:47 PM
KMC Community Forums
Jul 23rd, 2010 06:17 PM
He's certainly asked me to read 10-20 page threads to catch up and put my 2-cents in. That's really a mystery but I was not going to entertain his request.
