Ex Katrina/New Oleans Mayor Says CIA Wanted Him Dead
- Thread starter LONDON
- Start date
See.. you can't find one cause there isn't one. You did a half ass read and response and your to E-proud to admit it... so NOW you think you can pass it off as if 'Im the one who doesn't know what an assumption is' when Im proclaiming YOU TWO are the ones who are passing assumptions off.. :cheeky: Lol@ you taking 10 seconds to post a response but acting as if your to busy to answer my question of WHAT ASSUMPTION have i passed off..
its ok.. I forgive you.
its ok.. I forgive you.
LMFAO have you read the thread yet? I asked him to point out what I was assuming and he has yet to answer the same question..
Assumption (uh-suhmp-shuhn): the act of taking for granted or supposing.
so i guess if me saying that people will believe a mayor over a message board poster is an incorrect 'ASSUMPTION' then please, id love to see you explain that
unless you, my friend, are the one with the incorrect definition of the word assumption OR you are not reading the discussion and are simply jumping to someones defense.. :knockout:
STOP BEATING AROUND THE BUSH AND TELL ME WHAT IM ASSUMING.
Assumption (uh-suhmp-shuhn): the act of taking for granted or supposing.
so i guess if me saying that people will believe a mayor over a message board poster is an incorrect 'ASSUMPTION' then please, id love to see you explain that
unless you, my friend, are the one with the incorrect definition of the word assumption OR you are not reading the discussion and are simply jumping to someones defense.. :knockout:
STOP BEATING AROUND THE BUSH AND TELL ME WHAT IM ASSUMING.
What I found to be the most comical, is that in the process of comparing the credibility of a known variable (politician since they are all discoverable) to an unknown variable (siccness poster) - the known in the equation as a group has a very questionable reputation for credibility!
Also the GOM has fallen on hard times.
I think thats a pretty safe assumption. Wouldn't you?
to assume that someone has said 'cred/status' when you DONT know them is an assumption in itself. I siimply said that the words of someone who posts annonymously on a message board doesn't hold the same weight as compared to the words of a former mayor.
If you truely disagree about that then your delusional and are grasping for straws to form an arguement simply for the sake of argueing.
I agree... heres what ive learned from the 10+ years ive been on and off this forum.
from what I can tell, The GOTM forum 3 types of posters..
The 'i know big words but very little info' types, like 'Mr Nice Guy' who will fill there replies with big worded fluff in a vain attempt to obscure the fact that there expansive vocabulary is the actual limit of their intellectual prowess. Its like the guy who won't buy a hybrid if it looks like a regular car because they want people to know they bought a hybrid.
The 'I don't know what your talking about but agree with the guy above me' poster who doesn't read the thread, doesn't know enough about the facts but wants to appear to be an intellectual by agreeing with someone else in the thread for the simple act of appearing as if they are all knowing on the subject as well.
The 'I know big words but don't care types' like, heresy,2-0-sixx etc who are very intelligent and have a very large vocabulary and know there shit, but feel as if they don't have to show it off in every post and will respond occasionally with one or two words on a subject.
to assume that someone has said 'cred/status' when you DONT know them is an assumption in itself. I siimply said that the words of someone who posts annonymously on a message board doesn't hold the same weight as compared to the words of a former mayor.
If you truely disagree about that then your delusional and are grasping for straws to form an arguement simply for the sake of argueing.
I agree... heres what ive learned from the 10+ years ive been on and off this forum.
from what I can tell, The GOTM forum 3 types of posters..
The 'i know big words but very little info' types, like 'Mr Nice Guy' who will fill there replies with big worded fluff in a vain attempt to obscure the fact that there expansive vocabulary is the actual limit of their intellectual prowess. Its like the guy who won't buy a hybrid if it looks like a regular car because they want people to know they bought a hybrid.
The 'I don't know what your talking about but agree with the guy above me' poster who doesn't read the thread, doesn't know enough about the facts but wants to appear to be an intellectual by agreeing with someone else in the thread for the simple act of appearing as if they are all knowing on the subject as well.
The 'I know big words but don't care types' like, heresy,2-0-sixx etc who are very intelligent and have a very large vocabulary and know there shit, but feel as if they don't have to show it off in every post and will respond occasionally with one or two words on a subject.
LoL, what a waste of a post.
Your seriously trying to argue that a forum troll is more believeable to the public, compared to a mayor. Your making yourself look stupid, which doesn't bother me at all, because your only trying to argue because its contrary to what I said, even if its common sense. LOL. who do people believe more, forum trolls or mayors?... yeeeaahhhh ok. I guess your still hung up on our nuclear power disscussion. Im sure if I said the sky was blue, you would waste the time to think of other similar colors the sky maybe at certain times of the day... but when its all said and done, you didn't prove or disprove anything except the fact that you have a chip on your shoulder and its making you argue stupid points. But keep it up, its not hurting me in the slightest and am actually amused by your attempts.
Your seriously trying to argue that a forum troll is more believeable to the public, compared to a mayor. Your making yourself look stupid, which doesn't bother me at all, because your only trying to argue because its contrary to what I said, even if its common sense. LOL. who do people believe more, forum trolls or mayors?... yeeeaahhhh ok. I guess your still hung up on our nuclear power disscussion. Im sure if I said the sky was blue, you would waste the time to think of other similar colors the sky maybe at certain times of the day... but when its all said and done, you didn't prove or disprove anything except the fact that you have a chip on your shoulder and its making you argue stupid points. But keep it up, its not hurting me in the slightest and am actually amused by your attempts.
The whole point of this discussion was not whether it was a safe assumption, it was whether it was an assumption at all! Which you just said it was.
Exactly
The definition of anonymous means you don't know who that poster is.
Why else would one argue here? I surely do it for the sake of arguing.
Which one are you? 4 - Cupcaker?
Thanks for the compliment about my vocabulary though. I always thought it was just average
The whole point of this discussion was not whether it was a safe assumption, it was whether it was an assumption at all! Which you just said it was.
Exactly, the nature of many forums (including this one) leaves the question as to who the fuck you really are, and thats what your arguement is.. "You don't know who the siccness poster is so you can't say his words hold more weight then a mayors."... i mean cmon guy, seriously? Do you have that much of a hard on to 'one up' me on everything i say that you really lowered your standard of debate to argue with me about who people believe more, a forum poster or a mayor? LOL
Why argue something thats not worth argueing over? Why not waste your time on arguements your going to actually win? I mean, you made valid points in our nuclear power discussion.. although some weren't based on any facts or reality, but you at least had an opinion that was worth reading.. here, your just wasting time backpeddleing on a previous statement when it would have been easier to say "I misunderstood your post".. I would have at least respected that more, i mean you aren't infallable. YOU do make mistakes. Much like your entire presence in this thread..
Thanks for the compliment about my vocabulary though. I always thought it was just average
lol. So how would the absence of ones identity confirm the credibilty over ones who's identity is well known?
I see that. Seems to be a personal issue you have been struggling with.
how is that philosophical? I mean you did just say your here to argue for the sake of arguing, so how was me saying that you would argue the color of the sky with me phiolosophical when it was just pretty much self-admitted?
I see that. Seems to be a personal issue you have been struggling with.
how is that philosophical? I mean you did just say your here to argue for the sake of arguing, so how was me saying that you would argue the color of the sky with me phiolosophical when it was just pretty much self-admitted?