DE Sidious vs ROTS Yoda, Mace, and Dooku

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
I've noticed a pattern recently. Sometimes people say things without thinking. I'm guilty of it sometimes, but I also try to call it when I see it. Sometimes this means that I have to call myself 'stupid' (which I've done plenty of times) and sometimes I have to call someone else stupid. This has happened plenty of times too. I'm afraid that our particular situation, Ninja, is the latter. The second thing I've noticed is that when someone really, really wants to be right they lose sight of the argument and simply want to be the 'winner' for the sake of the argument itself. At this point personal attacks generally start flowing like wine. For some reason, you and Dr. M (formerly DS) have a tendency towards this state of mind more than any other poster I've yet seen. Your defense mechanism is (or at least initializes) similar(ly), too. You both imply that the other poster (me) is somehow wrong, although you can't exactly define how. Then, having established (in your own minds) that you've proven the other poster (me) wrong you assert that they (I) am 'embarrassing myself' or some other condescending claptrap. All this does is establish your own lack of confidence in your position. It is similar to my grammar Nazism- I only used it (I quit some time ago) in an attempt to make myself win, not make myself right. You are making the same mistake, and you are looking just as foolish as I did.

Of course, my conclusions about you are based on a very small amount of interaction. Please, prove me wrong. If you can abandon your less than desirable 'debating' habits long enough to prove your point then you will have won. I'd love to be wrong about you, but I don't think I am.

The 'infamous assume line' is fairly archaic. As far as I know, however, the English character 'U' is never an acceptable replacement for the word 'you' in written communication outside of the mongrel 'text speak' that plagues the Internet. By using 'you' rather than 'u' to make the reference I was directly quoting the (verbal) source material (The Odd Couple, I think). The character said the phrase out loud- he can't possibly have said "'u' and me" because he can't have said 'u'. It just isn't a word to be expressed in the English language.

(Why would I PM you an apology? Have I done something to hurt your feelings? Meow meow want his bottle?)

((I watched a lot of Mr. Roger's Neighborhood as a kid. So sue me.))

(((I realize that 'so sue me' is a sentence fragment, but this is a colloquialism that is used widely enough that I think it has become common usage.)))

No, just stop now. Do you think because you start your sentences with "I've noticed a pattern..." and splurge into some ridiculous psychological rant about me and my nonexistent trolling, sentence errors and sour debating makes it a reality? You screwed up. It's not the first time. Now, you're frustrated because I called you out on it. I know I used the english language incorrectly. I did it on purpose. It is a mechanic that is a part of the pun. You took it literally when I presented it to you facetiously. Does that mean you messed up once again?

Oh wait. In a few moments, Red Nemesis will come out with a novel of a post explaining how I am cleverly trolling and baiting everyone with my "string pulling" and excellent skills in manipulation! Any old explanation (Even if it lacks evidence, which it does one hundred percent of the time) to clear Red Nemesis from more than three f*ck ups in one thread.

Hold on now. He has changed it up a little. Now, you're trying to play the seasoned debater who can see right through my foolish facade because you've experienced where I've been before, like you've grown from anything (Which is grossly wrong because you cannot just admit that you screwed up the classic "Assume" quote despite the invalid grammar.)

You need to stop thinking you can see right through me, Dr. Phil.

You're a little less than colossally annoying at this point. The quote is not supposed to exhibit flawless English. Firstly, you didn't seem to notice that. You wrote that point in stone when you decided to prove you were taking the sentence literally in your next post. You did that once again in the second paragraph in your latest entry to this thread.

I'm sure you knew that, right? If you weren't so busy hounding me and following me around the GDF and the SWV, maybe you wouldn't have made three slip ups simultaneously in one thread.

"You make an ASS out of U and ME."

Do you see? It spells "ASSUME."

"You make an ASS out of YOU and ME."

"ASSYOUME." <--- Damn, that is not how "Assume" is spelt! Yikes.

Weird RN, you are guilty of the exact same thing as I am. That means personal attacks, calling me wrong without backing it up, unable to back up your own arguments, and then deferring to Faunus to save your ass, so I would suggest that you increase your self awareness before continuing your hypocrisy.

RN has haters.

Who knew?

Originally posted by Eminence
RN has haters.

Who knew?

stfu n00b

Originally posted by Eminence
RN has haters.

Who knew?

lotz

Smackdown plz.

Also, http://prime-eminence.mybrute.com/

Do it. You know you want to. I need pupils.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Weird RN, you are guilty of the exact same thing as I am. That means personal attacks, calling me wrong without backing it up, unable to back up your own arguments, and then deferring to Faunus to save your ass, so I would suggest that you increase your self awareness before continuing your hypocrisy.

This post is shorter than FN's so I'll do it first:
Accusations of hypocrisy:
[list=1]
[*]personal attacks: Could you quote an earnest insult that I've launched that wasn't simply turnabout? I don't know that I've ever initiated an exchange of insults with you (let alone sent any good ones).
[*]calling [you] wrong without backing it up: lolwut? I've said in the BB2 that I disagree with you but that's a given. Again, an example of this might prove that you aren't just padding your rant to fit the rule of three.
[*]inability to back my arguments: lolwut the second. I have statistics and authoritative sources to prove my points, and I use source material for my SW related arguments (russian site for the win). You have blogs and user generated content. And conjecture. Let's not forget "REVAN MITE HAVE KNOWN ALL OF MALAKOR SO HE BEATZ KAEDUS!'
[*]Deferring to Faunus to 'save my ass': This is a lie. I've never used Faunus as a backup. That he is even marginally intelligent agrees with me (see what I did there?) means that he's rebutted your posts in the past. On occasion I've felt that there is no reason to triple team you (me/faunus/MC is a lot of responses to make) so I've stayed out of certain rounds. That doesn't mean that I defer to faunus. Anyway, I'm better than he is in every way. 😛 (jklolroflcoptr?)
[/list]
I think that covers everything. If I missed anything I'll cover it in the inevitable follow up to salvage what little remains of your dignity- you've tried pulling rank (it didn't work), you've tried baseless assertions (I called you on them) and now you have two options: proof or insults. I strongly suggest that you go with the former.

All this attention is going to my head.

Originally posted by Genesis
No, just stop now. Do you think because you start your sentences with "I've noticed a pattern..." and splurge into some ridiculous psychological rant about me and my nonexistent trolling, sentence errors and sour debating makes it a reality? You screwed up. It's not the first time. Now, you're frustrated because I called you out on it. I know I used the [b]English language incorrectly. I did it on purpose. It is a mechanic that is a part of the pun. You took it literally when I presented it to you facetiously. Does that mean you messed up once again?

Anyway, I don't think that you're trolling here. You misused a quote (unless I'm wrong and the first usage was in a written format that allows for the 'u'/'you' switch) and now you don't want to admit it. If you show me that the joke was originally text based, or at least included a written component I'll back off. It just doesn't make sense for a joke that relies on the auditory similarity between the name of the letter 'u' and explicit meaning of the word 'you' to be a letter. The letter 'u' does not mean 'the person one is addressing'. As such it is nonsense if written/spoken that way. The joke holds if (as most jokes are) it was originally spoken and someone overanxious to emphasize the punchline wrote 'u' instead of 'you'. This would even explain your (incorrect) belief about the correct version- you might have seen the ham handed (is there a dash there?) version first.

Originally posted by Genesis

Oh wait. In a few moments, Red Nemesis will come out with a novel of a post explaining how I am cleverly trolling and baiting everyone with my "string pulling" and excellent skills in manipulation! Any old explanation (Even if it lacks evidence, which it does one hundred percent of the time) to clear Red Nemesis from more than three f*ck ups in one thread.

You were trolling. That's why you're on ignore. Sometimes I wonder why I bother reading your posts. I suppose I'm committed to respond, so here goes:
1. You aren't trolling/baiting right now (unless you are, in which case I'm falling for it)
2. What three f*ck ups?
3. I've given you my interpretation of why I think you are a troll. I see no reason to search through the archives just to reiterate a point I've made already.

Originally posted by Genesis

Hold on now. He has changed it up a little. Now, you're trying to play the seasoned debater who can see right through my foolish facade because you've experienced where I've been before, like you've grown from anything (Which is grossly wrong because you cannot just admit that you screwed up the classic "Assume" quote despite the invalid grammar.)

I've given you my rationale for why the joke cannot possibly use 'u'. If you have some evidence that discredits it (like the original usage, which would outweigh any logic or convention) then please submit it. Otherwise, I will not be responding to you again.

Originally posted by Genesis

You need to stop thinking you can see right through me, Dr. Phil.

Originally posted by Genesis

You're a little less than colossally annoying at this point. The quote is not supposed to exhibit flawless English. Firstly, you didn't seem to notice that. You wrote that point in stone when you decided to prove you were taking the sentence literally in your next post. You did that once again in the second paragraph in your latest entry to this thread.

Originally posted by Genesis

I'm sure you knew that, right? If you weren't so busy hounding me and following me around the GDF and the SWV, maybe you wouldn't have made three slip ups simultaneously in one thread.

And I'd like to know what the 'three slip ups' were.

Originally posted by Genesis

"You make an ASS out of U and ME."

Do you see? It spells "[b]ASSUME."

"You make an ASS out of YOU and ME."

"ASSYOUME." <--- Damn, that is not how "Assume" is spelt! Yikes. [/B]

You know, if you say these out loud (or simply have a basic understanding of articulating the English language) you find that these two phrases are indistinguishable when spoken aloud. Since it was first used in a conversation (which for our purposes means between two people in person) it can be reasonably assumed that the speaker was using words. 'U' is not a word. The changeover (if this is caused by an honest difference in our introduction to the phrase, rather than a deliberate attempt at conflict) would have been made by a writer worried about emphasizing the play on words, probably someone unsure of their general linguistic ability. There's no reason that we can't simply have been introduced to different forms. (Which is just a roundabout way of saying that I'm right because I have changed less from the original form. I have more fidelity than joo.)

Edit: would someone quote the evidence he brings, if he choses to support his position? I see no reason to read another rant if he can't rationally support his position. A concession speech is acceptable material to convey as well.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
This post is shorter than FN's so I'll do it first:
Accusations of hypocrisy:
[list=1]
[*]personal attacks: Could you quote an earnest insult that I've launched that wasn't simply turnabout? I don't know that I've ever initiated an exchange of insults with you (let alone sent any good ones).

I think that covers everything. If I missed anything I'll cover it in the inevitable follow up to salvage what little remains of your dignity- you've tried pulling rank (it didn't work), you've tried baseless assertions (I called you on them) and now you have two options: proof or insults. I strongly suggest that you go with the former.

You know what? I'm not walking away this time. You've irritated and harassed me in a thread for the last time. I told you to back off of me but you've chosen not to listen. Now, I'm going to embarrass you. I grow tired of this nonsense from you, Red Nemesis.

You almost seem like a DS sock. You use the same 'embarrassing yourself' line, you scoff at proper grammar and any show of intelligence and you are a question talker. (scratch that?)

Troll, sock, patronizer, etc.

When will you just give it up? You place grammar at the head of the debating race like it shows the importance of your message. Sure, it helps others to understand you conveniently and properly but for as long as I've been here, you haven't done much against me in a debate. Everything you've accused me of, you've lacked total evidence. I've questioned you and you have given me baseless rhetorical rants instead of answers. You do nothing but try to analyze everyone you debate with in some horrible attempt to pass yourself off as an intellectual individual. I love your English skills. They're great. Perception? Debating? Logic? It appears you're lacking in these aspects.

Of course you'd disagree. After all, this is probably just some clever device I'm using as the most amazing troll to ever grace the 'net, right? I'm sure you'll give me some shaky, unsupported and lengthy explanation as to why I'm such an all star troll. Or wait, am I sock this time?

Yes! Of course! This is Red Nemesis' latest conclusion! Hell, I might even believe it if it was evidence. Well, I might even believe it if you didn't change your accusation every time you follow me around from thread to thread.

Anyway, I don't think that you're trolling here. You misused a quote (unless I'm wrong and the first usage was in a written format that allows for the 'u'/'you' switch) and now you don't want to admit it.

Wrong. You misused it. How? You thought that you aced it by using organized grammar. It doesn't matter. The whole purpose is to peer at the quote and recognize that the words utilized in the former fragment in that particular sentence spells "Assume."

If you show me that the joke was originally text based, or at least included a written component I'll back off. It just doesn't make sense for a joke that relies on the auditory similarity between the name of the letter 'u' and explicit meaning of the word 'you' to be a letter. The letter 'u' does not mean 'the person one is addressing'. As such it is nonsense if written/spoken that way. The joke holds if (as most jokes are) it was originally spoken and someone overanxious to emphasize the punchline wrote 'u' instead of 'you'. This would even explain your (incorrect) belief about the correct version- you might have seen the ham handed (is there a dash there?) version first.

It relies on one or the other, depending on the context it's used in. That seems obvious. When you use it in a text-based context, you're supposed to amplify each entry of the word by using integration quotes, such as this:

When you assume, you make an "ass" out of "u" and "me."

Let's pick them out for elaboration.

"ass"
"u"
"me"

"assume"

^ It's a great discovery!

It does make sense. It doesn't grammatically but not all jokes rely on such language precision.

Was our initial disagreement (about your trolling) in this thread? If not, what were the 'three f*ck ups?

You trying to mask a nasty mistake. Actually, you're still doing it! It's great you're putting more effort into it know. You get kudos for effort, at least. I'm impressed.

1. You aren't trolling/baiting right now (unless you are, in which case I'm falling for it)

No, I am not. If anything, you are. You didn't contribute anything relevant to the thread as it stood within our discussion, you replied to my statement with a derogatory quote and then you waited for me to respond and indulged in a rant to chew at your bait.

You're either extremely ignorant or you're a flawless troll. Hopefully, if you reply, you'll explain to me a valid reason that evades yourself from being a fierce troll.

2. What three f*ck ups?

I've told you twice in this thread. Read down.

3. I've given you my interpretation of why I think you are a troll. I see no reason to search through the archives just to reiterate a point I've made already.

Yes, a point. Nothing more. One that lacks any cohesive evidence.

Well, I did use the tactics you are using and now I try not to because of an increased awareness of how others view those tactics. If that isn't personal experience and growth then I don't know what is.

You haven't learned much from this experience or our last one. It's absurd. You've made it clear you cannot see past your deadly grammatical skills for something as redundantly simple as a pun that plays on words.

Essentially, you're still using them. It's just more irony. It's a sad irony though. The more hilarious part of this is that you thought it was just some modern "internet speak integration of the quote. Is this more of that maturity you obtain?

I've given you my rationale for why the joke cannot possibly use 'u'. If you have some evidence that discredits it (like the original usage, which would outweigh any logic or convention) then please submit it. Otherwise, I will not be responding to you again.

I've given you evidence that credits it. More than once, actually. I just did a few quotes ago. You haven't given me any rationale that makes you right. You just rambled on about how wrong it is simply because the grammar is incorrect. Your logic is that because the grammar within the quote is incorrect, it must execute the possibility that a text-based joke is valid. You're stubborn and nothing more.

When a mature mind interacts with a less mature mind (especially a similar, albeit less capable one) it is hard not to see right through it. You haven't surprised me yet, except maybe in the vitriol of your posts.

Listen to this. Is this more hypocrisy? You're being condescending. You complained about me doing this earlier.

I don't get it. You need to explain this to me clearly. I never knew maturity involved lobbing a remark at someone in a thread (which was off topic, by the way) when you're not even involved in the discussion. I could understand it perfectly if you had been in the middle of a passionate debate with me but you weren't. You entered the thread with the intent to ...

Dare I say ... troll me?

It is a play on the syllables (phones?) of the word. There is nothing to suggest that it was written by a nincompoop. You still haven't proven that it was originally written with a 'u' so this remains an unsupported assertion. You're looking more and more like DS.

Hypocrisy. Further down in your last post, you state without a doubt that it was a spoken quote.

The PURPOSE of the pun is not only the factual element of it. The two words and the one letter within the sentence is meant to spell "Assume." It's no coincidence or fluke. There's more than one humorous aspect. It's multi-layered. That's why it's such an effectively funny quote. This isn't exclusive information, you know.

You have this idea that I'm 'following you around' in these two forums. What you haven't noticed is that we've had exactly three interactions: your original trolling thread on the SWVF,

No, I wasn't trolling. You assumed I was and even had the nerve to inform me of my intent. You gathered no evidence and simply walked away because you could not get anywhere. Why? Well, the argument would have ended long before your ridiculous rants if you have proof instead of aimless jargon.

followed by a long, blissful period of solitude, a choice remark of mine on the GDF (where you again claimed that I was 'stalking you' even though we'd only interacted once at that point)

No, you decided to throw accusations my way once again. You do not do that with anyone else. There are plenty of trolls on this board. Why not go bark at them? I've never trolled on this forum and I don't intend on doing so. Also, I thought I was on you ignore list. You just cannot resist a meaningless fight, can you? You had to click on that little tab that reveals my post, didn't you? Ugh, addictions are harmful.

and this final clash in this thread. That's hardly 'hounding' you. Also: you might notice that it was you that initiated our latest argument.

Why, because I legitimately fixed your quote that was used against me? You're either dreaming or you don't realize that you once again threw a jab at me:

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
You know what happens when you assume. You make an ass out of you and me.

And I'd like to know what the 'three slip ups' were.

Um, the three last posts you made before this one.

You know, if you say these out loud (or simply have a basic understanding of articulating the English language) you find that these two phrases are indistinguishable when spoken aloud. Since it was first used in a conversation (which for our purposes means between two people in person) it can be reasonably assumed that the speaker was using words. 'U' is not a word. The changeover (if this is caused by an honest difference in our introduction to the phrase, rather than a deliberate attempt at conflict) would have been made by a writer worried about emphasizing the play on words, probably someone unsure of their general linguistic ability. There's no reason that we can't simply have been introduced to different forms. (Which is just a roundabout way of saying that I'm right because I have changed less from the original form. I have more fidelity than joo.)

Oh, Red Nemesis! You're a gem of a fellow!

We're not saying it out loud. That's the whole damn point and you're missing it. It's pathetic and outrageously ridiculous. You're just not understanding. I explained the purpose of the quote earlier on, right? When you use it in the context you did, the correct way to use the pun doesn't require correct English.

It requires a "U."

Wait, how do you know it was first used in a conversation? It would seemingly have been used in writing, seeing as the aspect of the jest lies within the text it conveys. You understand that, right? It's amusing because you're so precise with your grammar but you couldn't see past a simple abstraction relating to a joke because of that. It's almost ironic. Sort of a "precise miss." An oxymoron, right?

I'm done here. You're hopeless. Stop following me around, please. Go find someone else to bother. Who knows, you might find someone who will put up with your empty accusations and random jabs. I won't. Hopefully, you'll appreciate the free education.

Are you guys serious?

Originally posted by Genesis
You know what? I'm not walking away this time. You've irritated and harassed me in a thread for the last time. I told you to back off of me but you've chosen not to listen. Now, I'm going to embarrass you. I grow tired of this nonsense from you, Red Nemesis.

You can't tell someone to back off, and then be like ‘WTF, he didn't back off’. You didn't embarrass him, I don't even know why you would want to. You’re taking this way to personal. Remember, this is an internet forum, not high school.

Assume scene

This is the first time it was used. From 4:30 and on.

What do you know. He uses the 'u' in 'assume' to emphasize the word 'you' in the phrase 'ass out of you and me'. He uses words, so 'you' is part of the phrasing of the joke, but 'u' is employed as the emphasis:

"May I use the blackboard, your honor?"
"Yes!"
"Thank you, your honor"
*bows*
[wheels over blackboard to counsel]
"Miss Olaf... You should never assume, because, when you assume...
[writes 'assume' on board]
you make an ass
[circles the letters 'ass' in 'assume']
of you
[circles the letter 'u' in 'assume']
and me."
[circles the letters 'me' in 'assume']
[applause]
"That's very good."
[...]
[close scene]

It seems painfully obvious that the word said is 'you' while the emphasis of the joke (the prop) is the letter 'u' on the blackboard. I wasn't using a blackboard so I only said the words of the joke, not the actions.

...

😆

Why the laugh? Did I win?

It doesn't look like you think I won.

*shakes fist*

edit: /insecurity?

You U (see what I did there?) are going to be embarrassed like the silly homoloving selfhating antiAmerican liberal u are.

I see.

/insecurity for realz

I lol'd at this:

"May I use the blackboard, your honor?"
"Yes!"
"Thank you, your honor"
*bows*
[wheels over blackboard to counsel]
"Miss Olaf... You should never assume, because, when you assume...
[writes 'assume' on board]
you make an ass
[circles the letters 'ass' in 'assume']
of you
[circles the letter 'u' in 'assume']
and me."
[circles the letters 'me' in 'assume']
[applause]
"That's very good."
[...]
[close scene]