Awesome U.S. gun/defensive laws.

[Sparhafoc]

Now follow me on this theoretical example if you try I think you can understand it:

If A person wanted to keep B person silent what would be the best way to do this? Ask them politely? Insult them? Or choke hold them unconscious?

Obviously making them lose consciousness would be the most effective. Yes violence does solve certain problems.

Mentally and morally deficient.

 

[BoganUSAFFLClerk]

Demonstrably not Sparhafoc's first interaction with you (and here). I thought you said you worked with computers?

Sigh. You don't think given the context it is the first reaction IN THIS THREAD that was HOSTILE? Again the point I am making is that I cited law and Spar literally just started off with insults. Read the entire context from citation of gun forms to me saying come at me bros to draw attention to the thread to him waffling on bullshit.

This is criticism not hostile. Compared these two and tell me they are even remotely the same.

One is a direct insult the other is not.

 

[BoganUSAFFLClerk]

Mentally and morally deficient.

It isn't a question of mental or moral quandaries - simply being effective.

If people wanted to silence you physically against your will would asking you be more effective? Would insulting you be more effective? Or beating your ass unconscious?

Obviously if you are unable to speak that is far more effective than you being able to speak. Correct? Ok then.

 

[Sparhafoc]

there are plenty of idiots in this world who think that violence can solve all their problems.

QED

 

[BoganUSAFFLClerk]

Spars very first comment in yet another thread citing nothing but law:

I cited law.

Spar only called me a Redneck Racist. Spar is the toxic troll here not me. Remember the 20 or so pages in Ridulous gun law thread? That was between him and hackenslash and we all know it.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Spars very first comment in yet another thread citing nothing but law:
View attachment 531
I cited law.

Spar only called me a Redneck Racist. Spar is the toxic troll here not me. Remember the 20 or so pages in Ridulous gun law thread? That was between him and hackenslash and we all know it.

Yet more examples of dishonest cropping of images.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Spar only called me a Redneck Racist. Spar is the toxic troll here not me. Remember the 20 or so pages in Ridulous gun law thread? That was between him and hackenslash and we all know it.

Who are you talking to? HWIN? Are you somehow under the impression that HWIN isn't just as well aware that you're a pathetic little troll?

 

[BoganUSAFFLClerk]

Yet more examples of dishonest cropping of images.

Fine upload a cropped image defending yourself. If I could do it simply a "more competent" person could do better right?

 

[BoganUSAFFLClerk]

Who are you talking to? HWIN? Are you somehow under the impression that HWIN isn't just as well aware that you're a pathetic little troll?

Don't speak for anybody else given you clearly don't know what you yourself have done.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Fine upload a cropped image defending yourself. If I could do it simply a "more competent" person could do better right?

And more obvious trolling as we all know that I've stated repeatedly that offering screenshots of threads is not only redundant and absurd given this forum itself IS a written record of events, but also that I have stated that believing it necessary to submit screenshot images as proof is entirely contrary to anything related to competence. In reality, it shows no competence of how forums work, no competence of how writing works, no competence of how the forum software works, and no competence with respect to the erroneous implicit assumption that 'the eye cannot lie' which I have already exposed before.

So yeah, trolling and stuff.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Don't speak for anybody else given you clearly don't know what you yourself have done.

And I'll do what you tell me to when you put fishnet stockings on your head, dance the polka on the roof, and call me daddy.

 

[Sparhafoc]

you clearly don't know what you yourself have done.

Because Qbro-not-a-troll-really knows better what I myself have done than i do!

 

[Sparhafoc]

Awesome U.S. gun/defensive laws.

Keep banging the rocks together, lad. Eventually, a spark of logic might happen.

leagueofreason.org.uk

So, instead of using the forum software to either quote (when writing), or jump back a page or two to read the string of conversation (when reading), we should instead post highly selective, specific snaps of just the bits of posts we want to talk about, and that gives it context, presumably because of the yellow border around it....?

Selectively editing a snippet of conversation and putting a yellow border around it is called 'editing' - it's not the full context, it's the context the editor wants you to see - the assumption we're supposed to be buying into is something like 'your eyes can't lie'? This is either willfully inane, or naive to the point of delusion. Example: quote-mining. It's really easy to take a snippet of conversation and pretend that the writer meant something different.

e.g.



It's there, it's written above in post 50 by Qanon guy... I could chop that up real nice, pop a lime green (so much more seductive than yellow) border round it, and project it onto the sky.... and it would still be mendacious as hell, and every single person here would know it. Every single person here would know it.

That's the real issue; repeatedly using manipulative 'tricks' to try and score imaginary points in an imaginary game in which someone can win screams bad faith. Screams it from the 2nd post, in this case, and only be... come at me bros... more comical as it went on.

So no, I don't think I'll abandon employing my ability to read just to make clown games easier. Insisting that the forum functions don't work when they clearly do when everyone else uses them routinely is all part of the clown show.

 

[BoganUSAFFLClerk]

Who are you talking to? HWIN? Are you somehow under the impression that HWIN isn't just as well aware that you're a pathetic little troll?

Considering even he thinks you should drop your contentious nonsense and remain on topic says a lot. Even a well known member thinks you are out of line.

 

[Sparhafoc]

View attachment 532
Considering even he thinks you should drop your contentious nonsense and remain on topic says a lot. Even a well known member thinks you are out of line.

Don't speak for anybody else given you clearly don't know what you yourself have done.

Oh wait, it's not sauce for the goose, it's trolling for the troll.

 

[BoganUSAFFLClerk]

Because Qbro-not-a-troll-really knows better what I myself have done than i do!

Oh look more name calling disrespectful.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Oh look more name calling disrespectful.

Oh no, the manic obsessive troll thinks I am not showing him sufficient respect.

Nothing to do with 'disrespectful' being the wording of the mod-note above, is it Qbro?

You realize that there are other rules in this forum too, right? You don't want to overbid here, your bluff might backfire.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Sigh. You don't think given the context it is the first reaction IN THIS THREAD that was HOSTILE?

Oh, if we are talking about just this thread, then yes, it was. But that ignores the week of interactions between the two of you. You realize that this thread does not exist in a vacuum.

Again the point I am making is that I cited law and Spar literally just started off with insults.

Because you tagged many people here to your boring thread after interacting with others on different threads of this forum, again, this thread does not exist in a vacuum.

Read the entire context from citation of gun forms to me saying come at me bros to draw attention to the thread to him waffling on bullshit.

There is nothing to read because the true context happened in other threads before you tagged people into this thread. Again, this thread does not exist in a vacuum.

Spars very first comment in yet another thread citing nothing but law:

I cited law.

Spar only called me a Redneck Racist. Spar is the toxic troll here not me. Remember the 20 or so pages in Ridulous gun law thread? That was between him and hackenslash and we all know it.

July 10th now. That thread also does not exist in a vacuum.

However, would you like some cheese with your whine?

 

[Sparhafoc]

View attachment 532
Considering even he thinks you should drop your contentious nonsense and remain on topic says a lot. Even a well known member thinks you are out of line.

Again, everyone here can read. Your obvious manipulation is confounded even by your selective images.

You are claiming that HWIN thinks X about me and have posted a picture of HWIN speaking to another person altogether. This is so obviously deceitful and manipulative - who do you think you're going to fool?

Yet supposedly it is me being unreasonable here, despite you repeatedly contriving bullshit like this.

 

[Sparhafoc]

You realize that this thread does not exist in a vacuum.


... this thread does not exist in a vacuum.


... Again, this thread does not exist in a vacuum.


.... That thread also does not exist in a vacuum.

To use Qbro's approach: so here we can see you saying that this thread exists in a vacuum.... except, of course, he'd unnecessarily take a screen capture of it and pop a yellow border around it.