Juan_Bottom wrote:Yes you did, page 32.
thegreekdog wrote:At the risk of being accused of bias (although, really, I don't always agree with BBS), the history of BBS vs. Symmetry or BBS vs. JB goes something like this:
Step One: JB/Symmetry make a point.
Step Two: BBS attempts to refute.
Step Three: JB/Symmetry do not adequately refute BBS's refutation.
Step Four: BBS notes the inadequacy.
Step Five: JB/Symmetry accuse BBS of being... whatever... ad hominem attacks usually.
When BBS gets into discussions with others (say, for example, Neoteny or Haggis), this process does not happen. Therefore, it's not BBS that's "an anything goes poster of late." If that was the case, there would be any number of forum regulars who we could sub in for JB or Symmetry. Perhaps it's you who is doing something wrong (I would say Step Five).
This is retarded. How insulting is this to me? YOU ALREADY KNOW and I HAVE ALREADY SAID IN THIS THREAD: I HAVE BBS ON FOE SO I CAN'T SEE HIS POSTS.
HOW THE f*ck DO I "INADEQUATELY REFUTE" SOME SHIT I CAN'T EVEN READ? That makes your whole post an outright lie. Take it back
Obviously the reason Sym and I are in a whole other category is because we're the only one's who fricking think before we post. Jesus.
Page 2 you immediately posted after I said that I had BBS on foe. You were making fun of my post. And there are other threads that you've posted in where I said I had BBS on foe. Certainly you participated in the discussion when I foed him.
Perhaps if you could only read...
JB accusation: "You (TGD) said that I always cowardly refuse to respond to bbs' posts attacking mine while you (TGD) know that I cannot see his posts."
TGD response: "I never said you refused to respond to BBS's posts attacking yours. I said you responded (which is the opposite of "refuse to respond"), generally, with ad hominems. I never called you cowardly."
JB response #1: "[Y]ou immediately posted after I said that I had BBS on foe." The implication being that TGD knew that JB had BBS on foe.
TGD response to #1: I can only tell you that I didn't know that you had BBS on foe. Why would I lie about that? What have I possibly got to gain?
Apparently you've dropped the thought that I said you cowardly refuse to respond to BBS's posts.
In sum, you're going to lose this argument (unless you resort to ad hominems, and then you can parachute your way out again).