Lucky's pick 02-04-06

[allsmiles]

People here are trying to explain to you how ridiculous no worries logic is in stating that by simply being a citizen automatically makes anybody good for society.

No Worries logic was confined to homosexuals. you were the one who deliberately misquoted him, deliberately edited his post to your liking and then condemned him based on your edit. You expanded the scope of the discussion to include something that No Worries hadn't. I seriously doubt he would have been stupid enough to make the leap that you've read in between the lines.

You're not that dumb. You're playing stupid, trying to make others look foolish in trying to explain such a simple thing. You know his logic is flawed and like I said, I don't buy it that you're just not getting it.

you're right, i'm not that dumb, so maybe there's something to what i'm saying. maybe i don't get it because you're in the wrong. maybe red flags come up when i see people who are incapable of entertaining the possibility of being wrong. alarms go off when i see someone unabashedly change the words of another and then condemn the other based on the change.

i'm sorry Poly, but you're wrong here. you looked beyond what No Worries said and condemned him based on what you needed him to say.

he was speaking of homosexuals, you applied his logic to something outside of the scope of the discussion.

there's no shame in admitting that you're wrong. pride can be a heck of a thing... but i respect people who can take a step back and say, "wow, i was off base here, even if i disagree with him on this, i was wrong."

 

[Poly]

No Worries logic was confined to homosexuals. you were the one who deliberately misquoted him, deliberately edited his post to your liking and then condemned him based on your edit. You expanded the scope of the discussion to include something that No Worries hadn't. I seriously doubt he would have been stupid enough to make the leap that you've read in between the lines.



you're right, i'm not that dumb, so maybe there's something to what i'm saying. maybe i don't get it because you're in the wrong. maybe red flags come up when i see people who are incapable of entertaining the possibility of being wrong. alarms go off when i see someone unabashedly change the words of another and then condemn the other based on the change.

i'm sorry Poly, but you're wrong here. you looked beyond what No Worries said and condemned him based on what you needed him to say.

he was speaking of homosexuals, you applied his logic to something outside of the scope of the discussion.

there's no shame in admitting that you're wrong. pride can be a heck of a thing... but i respect people who can take a step back and say, "wow, i was off base here, even if i disagree with him on this, i was wrong."

:blabla:

 

[BillyBob]

:doh: OK, you are that dense.

No Kidding! :bang:

 

[allsmiles]

:blabla:

there it is people.

this is the explanation for deliberately misquoting a fellow TOLer in order to make a false point.

this bridges the gap between murder and consensual sex between two adult american citizens.

Poly, are really so dishonest as to believe that you can misquote people in order to make a point? i'm really not trying to push your buttons here :nono: but i smell a rat...

post #8.

did you, or did you not misquote No Worries to make a point?

and does that give me, or anyone else here the right to misquote you, deliberately, in order to make our own points?

 

[allsmiles]

there it is people.

this is the explanation for deliberately misquoting a fellow TOLer in order to make a false point.

this bridges the gap between murder and consensual sex between two adult american citizens.

Poly, are really so dishonest as to believe that you can misquote people in order to make a point? i'm really not trying to push your buttons here :nono: but i smell a rat...

post #8.

did you, or did you not misquote No Worries to make a point?

and does that give me, or anyone else here the right to misquote you, deliberately, in order to make our own points?

 

[Shalom]

allsmilies she inserted rapist and murderer to make a point ..... come on you are tyring to build a case that doesnt exsist.

 

[allsmiles]

allsmilies she inserted rapist and murderer to make a point ..... come on you are tyring to build a case that doesnt exsist.

exactly... it's a bad point to make friend. she was deliberately dishonest and that's what i'm getting at. she's a mod and is setting a bad example and so far, no one can make a case to defend her other than me being stupid, and Poly herself said that i'm not.

No Worries was using his train of logic to defend homosexuals.

Poly went beyond the scope of the discussion, she unabashedly misquoted someone.

my questions remain:

may i, or anyone else, deliberately misquote someone else in order to make a point beyond the scope of the discussion? may i use that misquote to condemn somone? may i misquote the bible now? may i misquote a mod? may i follow Poly's example?

 

[Agape4Robin]

exactly... it's a bad point to make friend. she was deliberately dishonest and that's what i'm getting at. she's a mod and is setting a bad example and so far, no one can make a case to defend her other than me being stupid, and Poly herself said that i'm not.

No Worries was using his train of logic to defend homosexuals.

Poly went beyond the scope of the discussion, she unabashedly misquoted someone.

my questions remain:

may i, or anyone else, deliberately misquote someone else in order to make a point beyond the scope of the discussion? may i use that misquote to condemn somone? may i misquote the bible now? may i misquote a mod? may i follow Poly's example?

What's to stop you from doing what you already do!?

 

[allsmiles]

What's to stop you from doing what you already do!?

Mrs. Truthsmacker, would you mind expanding on this? i have to admit, i'm a little :chuckle:

 

[Agape4Robin]

Mrs. Truthsmacker, would you mind expanding on this? i have to admit, i'm a little :chuckle:

Certainly.

You said.........."may i, or anyone else, deliberately misquote someone else in order to make a point beyond the scope of the discussion? may i use that misquote to condemn somone? may i misquote the bible now? may i misquote a mod? may i follow Poly's example? "

I say, you already do those things, so what's to stop you now?

 

[allsmiles]

Certainly.

You said.........."may i, or anyone else, deliberately misquote someone else in order to make a point beyond the scope of the discussion? may i use that misquote to condemn somone? may i misquote the bible now? may i misquote a mod? may i follow Poly's example? "

I say, you already do those things, so what's to stop you now?

thanks

if you'd like to find an example that would be fantastic :thumb:

also, we're talking about a moderator Robin, not little ol' allsmiles :chuckle:

and none of that really justifies what Poly did, either.

 

[Agape4Robin]

thanks

Welcome!:thumb:

if you'd like to find an example that would be fantastic :thumb:

I don't feel like it........maybe later.

also, we're talking about a moderator Robin, not little ol' allsmiles :chuckle:

and none of that really justifies what Poly did, either.

Yeah........so?

 

[allsmiles]

I don't feel like it........maybe later.

well, whenever you do feel like it, here are some parameters:

find an example where i deliberately and unabashedly edit someone's quote to make a point off of it.

Yeah........so?

i'm looking for a justification of blatant dishonesty. i've asked very pointed, very clear questions and no one has or can answer them. you're skirting the questions, you're avoiding accountability... this seems to be a running trend

i've put my neck on the line, i've made myself vulnerable. if someone can find a post i've made where i've deliberately edited someone's quote to make a false point, then you've got me and i'll suck it up like a man.

so... can anyone else offer an excuse, a justification, for Poly's dishonesty?

and can anyone logically bridge the gap between cold blooded murder and consensual sex between two adult american citizens? and can anyone tell me, may i now deliberately edit someone's words to make a false point?

 

[Agape4Robin]

well, whenever you do feel like it, here are some parameters:

find an example where i deliberately and unabashedly edit someone's quote to make a point off of it.



i'm looking for a justification of blatant dishonesty. i've asked very pointed, very clear questions and no one has or can answer them. you're skirting the questions, you're avoiding accountability... this seems to be a running trend

i've put my neck on the line, i've made myself vulnerable. if someone can find a post i've made where i've deliberately edited someone's quote to make a false point, then you've got me and i'll suck it up like a man.

so... can anyone else offer an excuse, a justification, for Poly's dishonesty?

and can anyone logically bridge the gap between cold blooded murder and consensual sex between two adult american citizens? and can anyone tell me, may i now deliberately edit someone's words to make a false point?

Like I said, do what you like, you will anyway. You may not deliberately misquote some one (which she didn't do) but you twist the meaning around to say the opposite of what their intention was.

 

[allsmiles]

Like I said, do what you like, you will anyway. You may not deliberately misquote some one (which she didn't do) but you twist the meaning around to say the opposite of what their intention was.

check out post #8... it was very deliberate darlin'. and while i might be guilty of what you're accusing me of, what i'm talkin' about is very different.

so, Robin can't offer a justification for blatant dishonesty. the only thing she can do is play the blame game and point fingers. that's not a defense people... that's skirting the subject, that's diverting attention...

 

[cattyfan]

Actually, all of you missed why exactly the post if funny.

"citizens are good for society...homosexuals are citizens...therefore homosexuals are good for society."

Really? How can that be? Homosexuals can't make more citizens. Therefore, based on the initial "citizens are good for society" logic, homosexuals can't be good for society since they can't sustain society.

That's why it was funny.

 

[Agape4Robin]

Actually, all of you missed why exactly the post if funny.

"citizens are good for society...homosexuals are citizens...therefore homosexuals are good for society."

Really? How can that be? Homosexuals can't make more citizens. Therefore, based on the initial "citizens are good for society" logic, homosexuals can't be good for society since they can't sustain society.

That's why it was funny.

Oh, yeah!:bannana:

 

[allsmiles]

Actually, all of you missed why exactly the post if funny.

"citizens are good for society...homosexuals are citizens...therefore homosexuals are good for society."

Really? How can that be? Homosexuals can't make more citizens. Therefore, based on the initial "citizens are good for society" logic, homosexuals can't be good for society since they can't sustain society.

That's why it was funny.

:chuckle:

well, yeah, if everyone were gay we'd be up the creek with no paddle... but i think that's only common sense, i got it :thumb:

 

[Agape4Robin]

check out post #8... it was very deliberate darlin'. and while i might be guilty of what you're accusing me of, what i'm talkin' about is very different.

so, Robin can't offer a justification for blatant dishonesty. the only thing she can do is play the blame game and point fingers. that's not a defense people... that's skirting the subject, that's diverting attention...

:yawn:

 

[koban]

....... i'm stupid.......