 |
Cheat Engine
The Official Site of Cheat Engine
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ricardo
I post too much
 Reputation: 1
Joined: 25 Sep 2007
Posts: 4418
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
you both fail at reading, although you seem to put much effort into your own writing.
for the third time.
1) I had set up the argument in a manner in which you can't win. I only change subject to prolong the lulz, k?
2) I think elpacco is retarded for backing up the bitch, my bitch.
3) Shun, I don't go to the forums often. I simply choose a day, and spend it on these interwebz, enjoying trolling idiots like you. And it only makes it funnier when you try to prove yourself correct.
4) If any of you two wants to continue double teaming me, you will both just run into a contradiction, and make both of you look retarded.
I best be trolling, but I am not at this moment. I am enjoying the interwebz and its unlimited supply of retards.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Shun2345
How do I cheat?
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| elpacco wrote: | | you just defined yourself as a strawman. purposefully changing the direction of an argument is what was referred to as presenting position Y. and remember how i said i only threw the insult because i thought it would increase the size of my e-penis by diverting the hate on someone else. this was a long time ago however. and as i look back, the only letters i see being used are A, B, X, and Y. i dont think you can create an alphabet off of that. you are being a strawman. inb4troll |
Oh god yes.
I'm so blinded by my urge to refute all his points that I miss the obvious parts of his post that define his failure.
You notice them elpacco. Thank you.
The sad part is that the last part of your post isn't any more convincing to ricardo than his argument is to me. It's useless elpacco. He's going to respond the same way regardless. If not troll, strawman. Probably also something that doesn't make sense like "when you call me a strawman then in turn all your friends are strawmen"
This is all my fault. When you and I first argued, I used the word "strawman." Because of that, ricardo has butchered it and used it wrong, and it adds another thing his spew of retardation, preventing us from getting anywhere.
_________________
I'm shun234. This is an alt. Check IP foar proofz. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elpacco
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
![]() Reputation: 30
Joined: 16 Oct 2007
Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ricardo wrote: | you both fail at reading, although you seem to put much effort into your own writing.
for the third time.
1) I had set up the argument in a manner in which you can't win. I only change subject to prolong the lulz, k?
2) I think elpacco is retarded for backing up the bitch, my bitch.
3) Shun, I don't go to the forums often. I simply choose a day, and spend it on these interwebz, enjoying trolling idiots like you. And it only makes it funnier when you try to prove yourself correct.
4) If any of you two wants to continue double teaming me, you will both just run into a contradiction, and make both of you look retarded.
I best be trolling, but I am not at this moment. I am enjoying the interwebz and its unlimited supply of retards. |
bolded is setting up position Y. so you are doing what a strawman does, but you arent being a strawman. if that were true, you would be being a troll, but you clearly just said you arent a troll. therefore you just contradicted yourself. either that, or you still dont understand what a strawman is.
you are either a strawman, or an idiot. which is it?
_________________
| [AM]Misery wrote: |
| FangBanger wrote: | | What is the best way for a lv19 Soldier to solo Sledge on Borderlands? |
Shoot him. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ricardo
I post too much
Reputation: 1
Joined: 25 Sep 2007
Posts: 4418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wow, you both think you are so clever, except you don't get a simple saying.
If we are already at position X and position Y, that means that we have already went from:
position A
position B
position C
position D
position E
position F
position G
position H
position I
position J
position K
position L
position M
position N
position O
position P
position Q
position R
position S
position T
position U
position V
position W
ITT: both of you are retarded.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shun2345
How do I cheat?
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
INB4STRAWMAN
YOU WILL NOT RESPOND TO EACH POINT IN THIS POST. ONLY ONE OR TWO. YOU'LL IGNORE THE OTHERS.
You already ignored the 5000 quotes I put in my last post, all proof of what I was saying. Proof that you claimed I'd never dig up. They are all examples of what I just claimed. Anyway, my post continues below the quote.
| Ricardo wrote: | you both fail at reading, although you seem to put much effort into your own writing.
for the third time.
1) I had set up the argument in a manner in which you can't win. I only change subject to prolong the lulz, k?
2) I think elpacco is retarded for backing up the bitch, my bitch.
3) Shun, I don't go to the forums often. I simply choose a day, and spend it on these interwebz, enjoying trolling idiots like you. And it only makes it funnier when you try to prove yourself correct.
4) If any of you two wants to continue double teaming me, you will both just run into a contradiction, and make both of you look retarded.
I best be trolling, but I am not at this moment. I am enjoying the interwebz and its unlimited supply of retards. |
retarded statements are bolded.
contradictory statements are underlined.
Notice how you claim you're trolling and then claim you're not trolling in THE SAME POST.
OK that first statement makes absolutely no sense. You set up the argument so that I can't win? What? So you've manipulated everything I said, and caused me to start this thread, so that I can't win? Wow. You only change the subject for the lulz? That's hilarious. I had that on my list of things you did that were pathetic. You denied it, and now you admit it.
lmfao. "I don't spend a while on the internet." "I spend a whole day on the internet." "I'm trolling retards like you." "I'm not trolling right now"
"If any of you two" Right. I double team you without pacco, and visa versa. That makes no sense. You need two people to double team. Plus, that statement was grammatically retarded. Learn english. Run into a contradiction? You mean contradict each other? Look who's talking. You contracted yourself twice in one post.
IT DOESN'T TAKE TWO PEOPLE "DOUBLE TEAMING" YOU TO SHOW HOW RETARDED YOU ARE. YOU SIMPLY DON'T ADMIT IT WHEN IT'S JUST ME BECAUSE YOU THINK YOUR EGO AND DUMB INSULTS WILL WORK AS AN ARGUMENT BECAUSE YOU LOST. BUT WILL TWO PEOPLE SIMULTANEOUSLY DESTROYING YOU IN DEBATE, YOUR EGO FINALLY DEFLATES A LITTLE BIT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU BEGIN TO SEE HOW YOU'VE LOST.
_________________
I'm shun234. This is an alt. Check IP foar proofz.
Last edited by Shun2345 on Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ricardo
I post too much
Reputation: 1
Joined: 25 Sep 2007
Posts: 4418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
....
Read your post.
Now have SOMEONE IN YOUR HOUSE WITH AN AVERAGE BRAIN read your post.
Now go and slap yourself in the face.
Then keep saying: "I will not say stupid shit just because it comes in my head. I will not assume something when information provided does not allow for it. I will not say that I am not double teaming even though there is another person running the same argument at the same time.
ITT: you both chose your best arguments, and they both contradict. I choose my wording carefully. I know what strawmen are. You abuse a term you don't know. Silly you.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokefag
Master Cheater
 Reputation: 51
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 488
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ricardo wrote: | ....
Read your post.
Now have SOMEONE IN YOUR HOUSE WITH AN AVERAGE BRAIN read your post.
Now go and slap yourself in the face.
Then keep saying: "I will not say stupid shit just because it comes in my head. I will not assume something when information provided does not allow for it. I will not say that I am not double teaming even though there is another person running the same argument at the same time.
ITT: you both chose your best arguments, and they both contradict. I choose my wording carefully. I know what strawmen are. You abuse a term you don't know. Silly you. |
win.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shun2345
How do I cheat?
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ricardo wrote: | ....
Read your post.
Now have SOMEONE IN YOUR HOUSE WITH AN AVERAGE BRAIN read your post.
Now go and slap yourself in the face.
Then keep saying: "I will not say stupid shit just because it comes in my head. I will not assume something when information provided does not allow for it. I will not say that I am not double teaming even though there is another person running the same argument at the same time.
ITT: you both chose your best arguments, and they both contradict. I choose my wording carefully. I know what strawmen are. You abuse a term you don't know. Silly you. |
LMFAO. I FUCKING TAUGHT YOU THAT WORD RICARDO. YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IT MEANT WHEN I USED IT SO I TOLD YOU TO GOOGLE IT. YOU THEN MISUSED IT THE VERY FIRST TIME BY CALLING IT "STANDARD STRAW."
What the fuck does the rest of your post say? "I will not assume something when information provided does not allow for it." What the fuck is that? Regardless of you denying your real age, that's something only a 12 year old would say. Or someone with 12 year old intelligence. Or a foreigner with a bad translator. No one is "running the same argument at the same time." Elpacco is making completely different points that I JUST ADMITED THAT I MISSED. How is what we're saying the same argument?
You just proved yourself wrong. First you say we're using the same argument, then you say that our arguments contradict, which would imply we're using different ones.
AND JUST LIKE I SAID, YOU IGNORED THE POINTS IN THE POST COMPLETELY.
JUST LIKE THE LAST 100 TIMES. I'M BOOKMARKING THIS AND THE OTHER THREAD I FOUND SO THAT I HAVE PROOF NEXT TIME.
_________________
I'm shun234. This is an alt. Check IP foar proofz. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ricardo
I post too much
Reputation: 1
Joined: 25 Sep 2007
Posts: 4418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shun2345 wrote: | | Ricardo wrote: | ....
Read your post.
Now have SOMEONE IN YOUR HOUSE WITH AN AVERAGE BRAIN read your post.
Now go and slap yourself in the face.
Then keep saying: "I will not say stupid shit just because it comes in my head. I will not assume something when information provided does not allow for it. I will not say that I am not double teaming even though there is another person running the same argument at the same time.
ITT: you both chose your best arguments, and they both contradict. I choose my wording carefully. I know what strawmen are. You abuse a term you don't know. Silly you. |
LMFAO. I FUCKING TAUGHT YOU THAT WORD RICARDO. YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IT MEANT WHEN I USED IT SO I TOLD YOU TO GOOGLE IT. YOU THEN MISUSED IT THE VERY FIRST TIME BY CALLING IT "STANDARD STRAW."
What the fuck does the rest of your post say? "I will not assume something when information provided does not allow for it." What the fuck is that? Regardless of you denying your real age, that's something only a 12 year old would say. Or someone with 12 year old intelligence. Or a foreigner with a bad translator. No one is "running the same argument at the same time." Elpacco is making completely different points that I JUST ADMITED THAT I MISSED. How is what we're saying the same argument?
You just proved yourself wrong. First you say we're using the same argument, then you say that our arguments contradict, which would imply we're using different ones.
AND JUST LIKE I SAID, YOU IGNORED THE POINTS IN THE POST COMPLETELY.
JUST LIKE THE LAST 100 TIMES. I'M BOOKMARKING THIS AND THE OTHER THREAD I FOUND SO THAT I HAVE PROOF NEXT TIME. |
Your proof, still backfires onto itself.
If you want to revive this argument over and over, you best hope that these links get deleted someday
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shun2345
How do I cheat?
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Being an uneducated high school dropout nazi, you would think that. Funny, you told me that you changed and I shouldn't hold a grudge, when clearly you haven't.
How is the post win?
-He claims that I'm using a term that I don't know, when I'M THE ONE WHO TAUGHT IT TO HIM, AND HE HIMSELF DOESN'T KNOW IT
-He contradicted himself by saying that we use the same argument, and then later saying we use different arguments
-He responded to NOTHING THAT'S PART OF THE ARGUMENT, running away from it JUST LIKE WE SAID HE WOULD
-The statements made about saying something to myself do not make any sense. Not just grammatically, but logically. They make absolutly no sense.
So, cokefag, how is that winning?
You've just re-inflated his ego and now he'll include your post in his next one with something unintelligent attached to it and again avoiding the argument by talking about your post.
_________________
I'm shun234. This is an alt. Check IP foar proofz. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xanatos
I post too much
 Reputation: 18
Joined: 06 May 2007
Posts: 2559
Location: US
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shun2345 wrote: |
Just in case you needed more strawman examples ricardo, go back to my last post. I dug up an old thread, very lulzy.
---------------------------------
Who is OP? You best be trollin'. Otherwise, you're a retard. OP is original poster. Who made the thread? Retard.
---------------------------------
Xanatos, ironic. YOU hurt MY feelings? lmfao you think that's why I made this thread?
YOU BANNED ME AFTER YOU LOST AN ARGUMENT. And you're saying I'M the butthurt one?
I'm the one saying "awww, did I hurt your feelings?" Becuase you went and banned me about it cause you were butthurt.
Way to be ironic |
LETS GET BACK ON TOPIC SHALL WE?
I banned you for a legitimate reason after you LOST an argument.
Keywords; lost.
In my recent post I directly challenged your analytical skills; as an attempt to get an objective response to gauge your analytical skills; which will be important later on.
In the old argument there one was one main argument; that I bandwagoned on everything to please ppl, and two interpretations (I won't be reposting)
At that point it had a lot of subjectivity; and wasn't conclusive.
Seeing as how I have clearly have the better set of analytical skills easily demonstrated by the fact that you take enormous assumptions (and live in your idiotic world of false bliss) in your argument.
I AM OBJECTIVE
I LOOK AT CONTEXT, TONE, MEANING, IMPLIED AND LITERAL, WHATS UNSAID AND STYLE FEATURES.
I also won in old argument due to having majority vote on a subjective topic.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ricardo
I post too much
Reputation: 1
Joined: 25 Sep 2007
Posts: 4418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shun2345 wrote: |
Being an uneducated high school dropout nazi, you would think that. Funny, you told me that you changed and I shouldn't hold a grudge, when clearly you haven't.
How is the post win?
-He claims that I'm using a term that I don't know, when I'M THE ONE WHO TAUGHT IT TO HIM, AND HE HIMSELF DOESN'T KNOW IT
-He contradicted himself by saying that we use the same argument, and then later saying we use different arguments
-He responded to NOTHING THAT'S PART OF THE ARGUMENT, running away from it JUST LIKE WE SAID HE WOULD
-The statements made about saying something to myself do not make any sense. Not just grammatically, but logically. They make absolutly no sense.
So, cokefag, how is that winning?
You've just re-inflated his ego and now he'll include your post in his next one with something unintelligent attached to it and again avoiding the argument by talking about your post. |
Seriously Shun. Logic is a word you can't use at this point.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shun2345
How do I cheat?
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ricardo wrote: |
Your proof, still backfires onto itself.
If you want to revive this argument over and over, you best hope that these links get deleted someday |
What? How does my proof "still backfire onto itself"?
First of all, learn to speak English. Seriously, you sound so fucking stupid. I'm not saying this just as an insult on the internet. You REALLY sound stupid.
Second of all, how is it backfiring? EVERY TIME I USE PROOF IN AN ARGUMENT, YOU JUST SAY THAT SOMEHOW ME PROVING YOU WRONG MAKES ME LOSE.
How the fuck has my proof backfired? You RAN AWAY FROM THE ARGUMENT AGAIN. MORE STRAWMAN EVERY SINGLE POST. Name ONE WAY it's "backfired"
Why would I want these deleted? I'm fucking saving them. They're proof for the next time. You contradict yourself every freaking post.
If I want to "revive this argument" why would I hope the links get deleted? How could I relive the argument if the links are gone? That makes NO SENSE. You honestly sound REALLY unintelligent.
| Xanatos wrote: |
LETS GET BACK ON TOPIC SHALL WE?
I banned you for a legitimate reason after you LOST an argument.
Keywords; lost.
In my recent post I directly challenged your analytical skills; as an attempt to get an objective response to gauge your analytical skills; which will be important later on.
In the old argument there one was one main argument; that I bandwagoned on everything to please ppl, and two interpretations (I won't be reposting)
At that point it had a lot of subjectivity; and wasn't conclusive.
Seeing as how I have clearly have the better set of analytical skills easily demonstrated by the fact that you take enormous assumptions (and live in your idiotic world of false bliss) in your argument.
I AM OBJECTIVE
I LOOK AT CONTEXT, TONE, MEANING, IMPLIED AND LITERAL, WHATS UNSAID AND STYLE FEATURES.
I also won in old argument due to having majority vote on a subjective topic. |
What. the fuck. did you just say.
OK. First of all, what recent post did you "directly challenge my analytical skills, and how the fuck could you go about doing that?
What past argument are you talking about? That was not the argument where you banned me after, because that argument is not a factual debate, so no one can win. If that were the argument, elpacco wouldn't have said you lost. Also, if you won the argument, elpacco wouldn't have made the thread, because banning me after WINNING wouldn't, as he said, "prove you're a fag." And if I'm remembering wrong, in the SIX PAGES, someone would've said "wait a minute, xanatos won that argument, so this doesn't make any sense."
"At that point it had a lot of subjectivity; and wasn't conclusive."
OK, that point just made no sense at all. Seriously. That sounds like you just took a few words and squished them together. It had a lot of subjectivity? What? It wasn't conclusive? Since that makes no sense to me, why don't you enlighten me, prove you're not a retard, and tell me what the fuck that means.
What "enormous assumptions" did I make? Show me ONE. Also, you again managed to make no sense. This is what you said:
"Seeing as I have better analytical skills, which is demonstrated by <reason here>."
See what's missing? WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR POINT. See as that, what? You need an end to that sentence, retard.
Seeing as flavor a is poisonous, demonstrated by the fact that suzy died, flavor b is better.
Seeing as flavor a is poisonous, demonstrated by the fact that suzy died.
SEE THE DIFFERENCE? YOUR STATEMENT WAS LIKE THE SECOND ONE.
"I also won in old argument due to having majority vote on a subjective topic."
That made no sense. A subjective argument can't have a winner you fucking retard. An argument about which bird is prettier is subjective. You can't have a winner to that argument. More people thinking bird B is better than bird C doesn't mean that those who think bird B is better have won the argument.
Goddamn it you're stupid. Respond to all those points rather than banning me again, pussy.
_________________
I'm shun234. This is an alt. Check IP foar proofz. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xanatos
I post too much
Reputation: 18
Joined: 06 May 2007
Posts: 2559
Location: US
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shun2345 wrote: | | OK. First of all, what recent post did you "directly challenge my analytical skills, and how the fuck could you go about doing that? |
| Xanatos wrote: | | Don't fret; its not morally wrong seeing as OP has the analytic power of a sponge (not to be confused with spunge). |
| Shun2345 wrote: | | What past argument are you talking about? That was not the argument where you banned me after, because that argument is not a factual debate, so no one can win. If that were the argument, elpacco wouldn't have said you lost. Also, if you won the argument, elpacco wouldn't have made the thread, because banning me after WINNING wouldn't, as he said, "prove you're a fag." And if I'm remembering wrong, in the SIX PAGES, someone would've said "wait a minute, xanatos won that argument, so this doesn't make any sense." |
| Shun2345 wrote: | | YOU BANNED ME AFTER YOU LOST AN ARGUMENT |
First there is an argument; now there's not.... MAKE UP YOUR MIND!
I'll repeat; I won that argument and the ban was legitimate.
I won it because of reasons below. Elpacco is an idiot; much like you, and has some personal vendetta against me that's why he did what he did.
| Shun2345 wrote: | "At that point it had a lot of subjectivity; and wasn't conclusive."
OK, that point just made no sense at all. Seriously. That sounds like you just took a few words and squished them together. It had a lot of subjectivity? What? It wasn't conclusive? Since that makes no sense to me, why don't you enlighten me, prove you're not a retard, and tell me what the fuck that means. |
The argument wasn't conclusive due to subjectivity. It makes complete sense. Maybe you need to learn how2english.
| Shun2345 wrote: | | What "enormous assumptions" did I make? Show me ONE. Also, you again managed to make no sense. This is what you said: |
Assumption; that you won the argument.
| Shun2345 wrote: | "Seeing as I have better analytical skills, which is demonstrated by <reason here>."
See what's missing? WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR POINT. See as that, what? You need an end to that sentence, retard. |
I'm saying that you're analytical skills are close minded and focus too much on one or two aspects - usually literal meaning. Your lack of ability to analyze a statement is shown by your lack of comprehension of my statement. And before you go blaming it on my writing skills; you now know (RIGHT NOW I MEAN) the full extent of my point (after I "baby-sat" you through it), and that fact inherently destroys any further argument.
| Quote: | Seeing as flavor a is poisonous, demonstrated by the fact that suzy died, flavor b is better.
Seeing as flavor a is poisonous, demonstrated by the fact that suzy died.
SEE THE DIFFERENCE? YOUR STATEMENT WAS LIKE THE SECOND ONE. |
Except you don't understand what statement two meant; so you can't really comment.
| Quote: |
"I also won in old argument due to having majority vote on a subjective topic."
That made no sense. A subjective argument can't have a winner you fucking retard. An argument about which bird is prettier is subjective. You can't have a winner to that argument. More people thinking bird B is better than bird C doesn't mean that those who think bird B is better have won the argument.
|
Makes perfect sense. Its still not conclusive, I'm not saying that. its just a hell of a lot more likely.
ie. Obama is a better president than Mccain because he got more votes.
The entire democratic system is based on this concept; so I doubt its flawed.
Your close minded interpretation of a sentence only adds to my hypothesis; that you have no analytical skills.
| Quote: | | Goddamn it you're stupid. Respond to all those points rather than banning me again, pussy. |
DONE FAGGOT. I'm didn't write an entire break down of why you're a total dumbass, I'm expecting you to try and figure it out yourself. Think about it before you make an ass of yourself again.
Edit; I'll continue to baby you through this.
Your lack of analytical skills makes your interpretation (which is you saying I bandwagoned a lot) less likely to be the correct analysis of the proof (being my actions), whereas my superior analytical skills make mine more likely. Add that to the fact; that only I know my full thoughts and motivations, and you have a non-subjective argument which conclusively shows how right I am.
I know what you're going to say; you're biased. So are you, so lets not even go there.
_________________
Last edited by Xanatos on Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:53 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ricardo
I post too much
Reputation: 1
Joined: 25 Sep 2007
Posts: 4418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tag team Flame war? O_o
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
