Quote from: MPOE-PR on June 27, 2013, 08:44:07 PM

Quote from: radiumsoup on June 27, 2013, 08:25:02 PM

stuff

The only way out for you is to show how you construct that mental "barrier to entry" so that it's not what I say it is. Go ahead. All the rest is really a waste of my time, which is valuable.

Your time is NOT comparably valuable, for the record, so before you shit all over your april2013noobface again, read a lot more of my posting history than what you've tried so far. Starting perhaps with April 2012.

Just got back from playing with my kids for a few hours (which is, I daresay, a much more valuable use of time than you would ever understand, since you don't know my kids.) I pity your flaccid mind if you think there's anything more valuable than that.

At any rate, since you still want to keep your little self-aggrandizing and attention-flagging song and dance going, let's look again at your continuation of your failure to apply simple logic. By repeatedly refusing to defend yourself against it, I'll take a bit of liberty and assume, to your credit, that you conceded to my claim that you put words into my mouth, upon which the rest of this discussion is based. If that's your intent, fine. Not exactly rational thought on your end, but I'll spot you a pity point just so you have something on the board. We're still stuck with the languishing agony of reading the repeated but still false claims that I said what I did not say. That, in and of itself, is a failure of logic as an informal fallacy often dubbed "staying on message" or "the big lie"... namely, the hope that repeating the same false statement over and over again will convince the audience that it's true. Works well in centrally-controlled places where the truth cannot be freely discussed, like China controlling news about the 1989 Tiananmen Square incident, etc., but to the detriment of your whole position in this exchange, it is not useful on a public forum such as this. Then there's the instant false dilemma that "the only way out" is for me to disprove your already identified failed logic. Finally, there's the appeal to age where you suppose that somehow the age of an account grants validity to the contained arguments. If anything, this exchange suggests an inverse relationship. Perhaps you might do well to start a new account, then, if there does turn out to be an actual correlation.

Well, look at that... it's movie time. With the kids. Gotta go use up my comparatively "valueless time", I guess, while you're stuck spending your considerably "more valuable" time reading this post. I'm pretty sure I win, no matter what you do.