What's new
By:

Jesse Jackson is a Clown and Needs to Stop Already

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sirkickyass said:
The full referenced string of "16 out of 23" starts here: https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php/668-The-Morman-hypothetical?p=20199&viewfull=1#post20199

I have no idea how you missed this.
Click to expand...

This is all so ridiculously "clear" and "easy," eh, Kicky?

(1) If you paid the slightest bit of attention to anything I say, which you obviously don't, then you would know that the "string" COULDN'T POSSIBLY start there, because I've already told you why it couldn't.

If it did, it would have to end AFTER the message from Catracho was sent.

(2) You conclude: "If anything it appears we gave you too much credit. It looks closer to 16 of 20 on this pass." This appears to be yet another concession that you have pointed to no string of "16 out of 23," as you (contrarily) claimed in the sentence before.
 
That is incorrect. Your 16th message in the sequence is time-stamped 07-07-2010 08:13 PM.

The warning you got is time-stamped 07-08-2010 05:44 AM.

Last I checked 7-08-2010 05:44 AM is AFTER 7-7-2010 8:13 PM.

But, I see you didn't even bother to click the links and just assumed I was either dumb or lying to you.

(2) You conclude: "If anything it appears we gave you too much credit. It looks closer to 16 of 20 on this pass." This appears to be yet another concession that you have pointed to no string of "16 out of 23," as you (contrarily) claimed in the sentence before.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight, your argument is that your behavior was actually worse than we claimed and that this somehow makes us wrong. Wow. Just wow.
 
To make fun of retarded people is in poor taste. This much is true. That said, what Hopper has shown us in this thread is that he is either retarded or just plain lacks common sense. Kick, I don't understand how you've managed to stay level headed with him. I mean, the mountain of evidence is so clear, it's ridiculous.
 
Sirkickyass said:
This is what I saw (with the reporter's name redacted). As you can see, I was not lying when I said I was given a link.
Click to expand...

OK, I'm satisfied that you did get a link. It's not to 16 of 23 posts, as I was supposed to be "looking" for and "easily find," but it is a link.

It also shows that you had reason to know exactly where to look, unlike me, but it still doesn't show the thing that you expect me to easily find.

Your attempt to ridicule me is about the same as me ridiculing for not "easily finding" the "unicorn (or any other non-existent thing) out yonder way."

Will you EVER get over yourself and cease trying to ridicule others for not knowing what you don't know (and CAN"T know, because it's untrue), I wonder? Somehow, I doubt it.
 
Oh, well, there you has it. Hoppy is sats'fied. All is well now. Thanks ya Hoppy. Mebbe we can all go to sleep now. Eh?
 
Sirkickyass said:
Let me get this straight, your argument is that your behavior was actually worse than we claimed and that this somehow makes us wrong. Wow. Just wow.
Click to expand...

No, that is not "my argument" at all, and only someone either extremely inattentive or extremely reckless with the truth would try to pretend that it was. Still got that strawman kit handy, I see.

My factual point (not argument) is that a string of "23" cannot possibly end after 20. I really didn't think I'd have to explain to you that 20 is not 23, but....
 
Oh, it was that thread?

Make that THREE laughing smilie faces.

Edit:

My count had it 15 out of 19, but I didn't really stress myself in counting, so I might have been off somehow
 
Last edited:
Sirkickyass said:
Hopper, if you were unable to figure out where the referenced string of posts was because the next 23 posts starting with https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php/668-The-Morman-hypothetical?p=20199&viewfull=1#post20199 contained 17 posts by you instead of 16 then I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...

The "next 23" end after the referenced starting point extend PAST the time of the message, Kicky, as I've pointed out several times, and therefore could NOT be the string I was told to look for. If you still can't understand that, then I don't know what to tell you.

And, yes, it is obvious: You don't know what to tell me.
 
I am now picturing aint being given directions to an oasis. He is told "go straight THAT way." He goes straight. The oasis shows up just to his left, he passes it by inches, then gets upset and complains that the directions he got were bad since the oasis wasn't directly in front of him.
 
The "complaint:" "Reason: 10 of the last 12 posts are from Hopper. Even with him on ignore, it makes these threads hard to read."

I wonder if it ever occured to any mod that if:

(1) I am making a lot of the posts, and
(2) The preceding posts refer to, and arise out of, my prior posts, and
(3) The intervening posts are responses to my posts, and
(4) The subsequent posts are responses to my posts, and
(5) He refuses to read my posts, because he has me on "ignore," then

He could not possibly have any real interest in following the thread, and hence that his "complaint" could not be legitimate.

His complaint would have much better put, and much more honest, if he had said: "Reason: BECAUSE he has Hopper on ignore, it makes these threads hard to read."

If he has me on ignore then he presumably doesn't WANT to read it, so why should he "complain" about his own choices?

His real complaint: I don't like Hopper, and he is posting. Can you stop him?
 
Last edited:
Hopper said:
The "next 23" end after the referenced starting point extend PAST the time of the message, Kicky, as I've pointed out several times, and therefore could NOT be the string I was told to look for. If you still can't understand that, then I don't know what to tell you.

And, yes, it is obvious: You don't know what to tell me.
Click to expand...

We've been over this.

Your 16th message in the sequence is time-stamped 07-07-2010 08:13 PM.

The warning you got is time-stamped 07-08-2010 05:44 AM.

Last I checked 7-08-2010 05:44 AM is AFTER 7-7-2010 8:13 PM.
Click to expand...

You made no response.

Phrased a different way, "Hopper, if you were unable to figure out where the referenced string of posts was because the next 20 posts starting with https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php/6...ll=1#post20199 contained 16 posts by you then I don't know what to tell you. Next time when we warn not to do something we'll try to refrain from making a counting error in your favor."

Alternatively, even if I had accepted your line of logic it would still lead to the same conclusion. If we take the 23 posts made immediately prior to the issuance of your warning, starting at https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php/668-The-Morman-hypothetical?p=20030&viewfull=1#post20030 and ending at https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php/668-The-Morman-hypothetical?p=20949&viewfull=1#post20949 the string still contains 16 posts by you out of 23. Your claim that no such string exists is so clearly erroeneous that I don't know what to tell you. Do you want me to provide you individual links to all 16 of your posts in the string?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page
Back
Top