Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:You dont care yet you come into every topic I make, say the same stuff, get called out, then tuck tail and resort to childish insults and ad hominem and strawman arguments.
I came onto this topic because it was popular. Notice I didn't even post on this for awhile after it started.
Okay, let's see some facts. Show me where I "come onto every topic you make [...] and resort to childish insults and ad hominem and strawman arguments." I'll take examples of all three as evidence. Please, back up your statements, citing with sources.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:My MO? Yep because im the one always going off-topic right?
Not at all. You define the topic and fuel the fire. Given that such a disproportionate percentage of your topics on the Serious Business forum are about the negative element within the police force, it would appear that you have an unusual fascination with it (I'll go back and give you percentages if you'd like).
Since you have established the reputation you have, it would be naive of you to post topics in the same vein and expect different results than what you've seen in the past. As such, each time you do, the only logical reason would be that you are either intending to fuel that same fire (of which you've seen evidence time and time again as evidence) or you are naive.
I'm assuming you are not naive, which is why I said you were fueling the fire. In a sense, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Was I mistaken in doing so?
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:I stated many times I have no problems giving it right back. Its not my fault you girls can dish it but not take it.
Here is a perfect example of infantile name-calling. Other than calling people girls, you have offered nothing of sustenance in this sentence. I can show that this is a trend as well, if you'd like.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:No one is vilifying anyone, once again no one has been able to provide facts of their claim made of others.
Would you like me to cite posts you've posted? I can. Most of them involve you name-calling, as well.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:People are mad I post topics yet they try and attack me, even though Ive said nothing wrong.
I believe Justin and a few others have pointed out where you have said things that were more than just factual and exhibited a distaste for police officers without offering any stipulation of only referring to a segment of the whole.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:My delusions? Dont make me laugh even though you are good at it.
Glad to hear.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:ONCE AGAIN what delusions?
Once again? When did I suggest delusions the first time? Not that it would surprise me, but I don't recall that. Cite sources for clarity.
Second, as for delusions:
- You don't believe you come across as someone who dislikes cops. FACT: You have stated that you "have no respect for cops," and more than half the topics you've started in this forum have been about specific examples of cops dishonoring the badge. Those are facts that can be referenced.
- You believe yourself to be intellectually superior. FACT: You exhibit, in virtually every post, both a lacking in the grasp of the most basic rules of the English language as well as a failure to avoid logical fallacies. A pattern of both of those are able to be referenced. I can cite if you wish.
- You claim that people have not "backed up" what they say. FACT: There are several examples, even in this thread, where people quote you directly to support their assessment of your posts. You've ignored those as of this posting.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:This is what I mean, back up what you say. There are no delusions here sport.
See above. Just because you either are unable to notice them or refuse to acknowledge them doesn't mean they go away, chief. I've listed, and can cite, the above.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:Let me know when I make a claim of someone without any evidence like how I was and still am ignorantly called a cophater haha.
Let's start with your statement (from above) "Everyone sees it except you." Show the evidence.
Or how about the ad hominem arguments, strawman arguments, and insults that I bring to "every thread [you] start." Show the evidence.
After someone brought up that you said you wouldn't help a cop on fire, you backtracked and said you meant the sh1tty cops.
Or let's reference when you said you had no respect for cops (
here). When that was called into question, did you rebut with a clarification of you only feeling that way about shitty cops? No. Your backtrack that time saying you don't care for cops (
here &
here). Not once did you clarify that you only meant shitty cops (and you have a sizeable inability to communicate clearly as you don't state those things until after the fact.
If I said I hate whites, what would that statement mean? Would it mean I hate low life white people? If it did, I would have the cognitive faculties to avoid communicating something other than what I meant by saying so at the onset.
You display a lack of that kind of foresight.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:Ill ask you to point out how im being juvenile and I will match you with some tripe of yours.
Please do. I will need some time to gather the volume of posts that would show how many times you have called names unnecessarily. Please bring up all the posts of mine where I have called you a name or resorted to something of a similar vein.
Oh, and again, I don't think you hate cops, so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up in this discussion.
As for who took this off topic, it was already off topic when I got here. However, given that (assuming you're not naive) you knew what this thread would turn into, the topic itself was to incite this very sort of exchange. Once again, you are either knowingly posting something to incite quarreling or you are naive to the trends thus far (which is obviously not true, as you addressed people many times as a posse or as your groupies ... indicating that you know the trend).
It's a simple syllogism, really.
Tenet 1: If you know that each topic you start regarding dishonorable cops (the majority of the topics you've started in this particular forum) accomplishes nothing but to fuel a quarrel, and
Tenet 2: if you start a topic regarding dishonorable cops, then
Conclusion: you know that doing so is going to do nothing but fuel a quarrel.
As such, the only logical conclusion (again, assuming you're not oblivious to the trends, which is a reasonably sure assumption since you reference it constantly) is that you start these threads for the sole purpose of fueling a quarrel, because you have plenty of history of evidence to know that to be the only result exhibited thus far.
In other words, unless you are ignorant ... and based on your posts, you are not ... you are starting threads like these to stir the pot, regardless of whether or not that was your intent with the first few (and I believe it was not).
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:Remember I wasnt the one that brought this off topic. Yet you said I was stirring the pot.
The topic itself was stirring the pot. Staying on topic and stirring the pot are not mutually exclusive. I wouldn't think I should have to tell you that.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:Yeah and you foolishly try to question me?
My initial interaction did not question you at all. Please cite sources.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:No pointing aout grammatical error means nothing.
It means that you have been incapable of successfully navigating Bloom's third level of learning. Occasional instances could be simple mistakes. You, however, display a pattern. If your ability to handle Bloom's third level are this unsuccessful, and your attempts to handle anything higher are as nonsensical as they've been, it has EVERYTHING to do with assessing your intellectual and educational development.
Or, more appropriately, if you cannot write and communicate like an adult, then go argue with someone who is down to your level ... a college freshman, maybe?
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:YOu have nothing else to say, well you never do, but this is just say.
"... but this is just say."
Thank you for proving my point. Your inability to communicate properly is riotous.
Ender Wiggin;801195 wrote:Like I said if you want to point out errors then we go through this whole topic and find everyones erros.
Errors are forgivable when the person does not claim superior intelligence. If they do (as you do ... an example of a delusion), it depicts hypocrisy.