Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

g5jamz

"Knock out" teen shot breaking/entering

287 posts in this topic

Agree to disagree doesn't exist in cyberspace. I must call you a *** and tell you why you're wrong and i'm always right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More the string here near the end where we are actually having a grownup conversation without words like "racist" and "sexist" are thrown around so easily. Where people are being slightly civil.

One of the reasons I don't enjoy this forum all that much these days.

Sometimes I'd swear half the people in here either can't or won't actually debate facts or information. They go straight to screaming racism or sexism or whatever else, and nearly always with zero justification behind it. It's lazy, it's lame, and it makes the person who does it look just plain inferior.

I've seen a very few posts where the charges were actually justified, and those came from people who aren't regulars on here, just infrequent surfers. Generally speaking, those folks don't last. They say something blatantly stupid and get banned quick.

But even so, you still have some on here who are either just too lazy or just aren't smart enough to hang in an actual debate, and those are the quickest ones to go for the character assassination.

Truth be told, the older I get, the less I enjoy anonymous internet arguments in general. But I enjoy them even less so when the participants are people who can't argue without falling back on lame garbage like we see in this thread.

When you see that better than 50% of the posts in a thread aren't actually even touching on the thread topic itself, that's a pretty clear sign that this type of crap has entered into the fray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta tell you this whole therapist session is just perfect. It's like what forums are actually supposed to be. Maybe we just need PhillyB to moderate every single thread.

That's Dr. Phil lyB to you Mr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're right... and with the exception of what I just posted, I've pretty much spent this thread trying to get Cantrell riled up enough to type out giant walls of text, which I've been pretty successful at.

I'm sure what I just typed will be ignored or one or two words will be pulled out and harped on for a while... so whatever...

so you claim to have been trolling ("I've pretty much spent this thread trying to get Cantrell riled up"). i'm not buying that. you believe the things you post. it's why you haven't been able to let it go. it's why you seize every perceived opportunity to blast me by aligning yourself with dumb posters making dumb posts toward me

btw why should i address your novel above when, in this very thread, you've posted both a "tl;dr" variant as well as a "well i was just trolling anyway" defense? you demand a higher level of respect than you give to others, which is why i'm perfectly content to tell you to get fuged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, let me write about how much I care about your response... See below.

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I'm a tad offended that you even need ask that.

He got all this "rape apology" stuff from one comment I made in a thread about a girl who was statutorily raped by her supervisor in a Starbucks. Yeah, I probably could have worded what I said a little differently, but you know Cantrell... picks up on one thing and runs with it...

Long story short (and I linked my previous response to this in the post from this morning) I was not saying the girl wasn't raped. I wasn't saying that she caused the rape or anything even remotely like that... rape is a serious, serious issue and I would never wish it on any woman. That particular thread was about her suing Starbucks because they didn't prevent the situation when in fact Starbucks and her own family intervened (multiple times I might add), she continued that relationship willingly, and then four years later, sued for money damages because of it.

The guy in that case was a sleeze, he slept with an underage girl and was rightly convicted for it. I've never said otherwise. My comments were SOLELY in regards to the lawsuit not the rape.

uhhh it wasn't "just" statutory. he plea bargained down to sex with a minor. he was her boss and used his authority to coerce a minor, a girl ~9 years younger than him, into having sex with him. she could not consent to a sexual relationship with a 25 year old man. sex without consent is rape. you keep saying things like "she continued that relationship willingly" when, even if she hadn't been coerced and had instead been "only" the victim of statutory rape, she literally could not in any way "continue a (sexual) relationship willingly" with a 25 year old man because she, again, could. not. consent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"i'm not blaming her for being raped but come on guys she continued that relationship willingly"

these are contradictory statements, and constitute an argument usually made by creeps who somehow think that "statutory" rape isn't as reprehensible as "forcible" rape

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the reasons I don't enjoy this forum all that much these days.

Sometimes I'd swear half the people in here either can't or won't actually debate facts or information. They go straight to screaming racism or sexism or whatever else, and nearly always with zero justification behind it. It's lazy, it's lame, and it makes the person who does it look just plain inferior.

I've seen a very few posts where the charges were actually justified, and those came from people who aren't regulars on here, just infrequent surfers. Generally speaking, those folks don't last. They say something blatantly stupid and get banned quick.

But even so, you still have some on here who are either just too lazy or just aren't smart enough to hang in an actual debate, and those are the quickest ones to go for the character assassination.

Truth be told, the older I get, the less I enjoy anonymous internet arguments in general. But I enjoy them even less so when the participants are people who can't argue without falling back on lame garbage like we see in this thread.

When you see that better than 50% of the posts in a thread aren't actually even touching on the thread topic itself, that's a pretty clear sign that this type of crap has entered into the fray.

fyi the post i quoted of yours that started all of this contained no (as in zero) facts. i replied with like 10 different facts disputing the notion that people are only victimized because they're trained to be victims by their parents. you're basically criticizing yourself here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep slinging, its not sticking.

So much for the nice adult conversation we had going on today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fyi the post i quoted of yours that started all of this contained no (as in zero) facts. i replied with like 10 different facts disputing the notion that people are only victimized because they're trained to be victims by their parents. you're basically criticizing yourself here.

Uh huh :lol:

You do realize your opinions don't count as "facts" right?

(aaahhh nevermind, you don't)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Of course, he's so massive he has his own gravitational pull. 
    • You miss the point. Taylor was here before. We picked him because of what he could do for our wide receivers not because he had some great knowledge no other person had on the staff. Shula and Rivera and Gettleman studied multiple college systems for months before signing Taylor or drafting McCaffrey or Curtis and would have drafted the same whether Taylor was here or not. They liked the way Taylor developed McCaffrey which showed his talent but Stanford's offense wasn't Taylors idea or unique to him. Shula has a connection to Taylor as early as when Shula was at Alabama.  The debate was whether Taylor was chosen to replace Shula because Shula didn't know what to do to run a college offense and if he screwed up Taylor would replace him. And that Taylor was the reason and most influential in getting McCaffrey. I said it wasn't even close to the truth and this plan predated Taylor and was more thorough and we'll thought out. Everything since then just confirms I was right once again like usual.  
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      18,243
    • Most Online
      2,867

    Newest Member
    GSO Goat
    Joined