New Testingstan

16309

but yeah i was going to say "who needs facts when you know something"

anyway i've redone those threads with youtube for better lols and effectiveness



moderators: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G5cv3JTm7Q

me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJXR280wbEg

moderators: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5C-cqw2s00

me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki0KCQAC5Wg

moderators: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nc_LIR5ExIU

me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paw_2EJBzFs

http://whynne.deviantart.com/art/Comic-Trolls-98357844

lol

jesus i never get work done with the idiotwebs

Dooey Jo wrote: Well you've pretty much won, but winning a debate on TEO is always a battle of attrition. Unless someone can bring up the MATHS! people will keep arguing till someone gives up. I think you should ignore the veganism and make him answer why it's worse to protect all beings, than potentially killing all if SCIENCE! says it's good. Instead of answering why his system is good, he is arguing that some arbitrary alternative is bad.

I thought he was trying to rope-a-dope me into saying that veganism/paying attention to other creatures was a good thing for humanity as a whole and that he was going to try and spring on me "consequentialism solves for all your harms, and is far more practical and useful than your vague bullshit!" (which is probably his best chance of offense.)

Except he just seems to have his fucking mind blown by the idea that someone might think it's a bad idea to hurt animals.

"I get annoyed when people call me a troll, a sociopath, insult my teaching ability, or my family (like calling my dad a war criminal just because he deliberately killed civilians now and then), or my state."

God that was so funny.

wat

So, Zentei is a fucking moron at understanding economics. Not that suprising.

it the internet

anyone who makes bold statements on anything is genearlly talking out their ass

It also appears I was the only one who actually read the damn article about "income inequality" which was actually trying to use Gini coefficient to describe wealthy inequality to dismisse "sudden inequality" (in general).

whoa did simon really say 'integrate gini for the win'

didn't mike used to talk about how posting on the internet makes everyone feel like an expert?

starku wrote:whoa did simon really say 'integrate gini for the win'

I want to know whatever the hell he is using that he somehow goes from total income = wealth as even as vaugely measurement.

Not to use, but to avoid because I like being able to use logic properly.

didn't mike used to talk about how posting on the internet makes everyone feel like an expert?

Yup.

reminds me of a libarc thread from not long ago

http://board.libriumarcana.com/viewtopi ... =15&t=9054

btw comrade tortoise = alyrium denrile and he's still an idiot. he didn't get the wealth = income - expenses either

starku wrote:wat

that's a post from the guy on essbee-dot-com i was talking about getting banned. i saw rye quoting it in his sig and it made me laugh, so i thought you guys would enjoy being exposed to it as well

xon wrote:So, Zentei is a fucking moron at understanding economics. Not that suprising.

Ok, D.Turtle takes the price for a complete lack of understanding for economics in that thread.

Seriously, how hard is it to understand that a single number to summarize millions of variables and changes, ratios etc is inherently going to be inaccurate? And that using a number derived for just "income" (which is likely very poorly defined), to try to judge overall wealth distribution is really god damn dumb.


This isn't disupting how poorly picked a metric it is, just he is using the complete god damn wrong one.

Well, I went and PM'd Dalton to ask him what';s going on with the mods having zero accountability and his response was "I don't have time for this". So yeah, pretty much consider every useless, douchebag, non-integrety having maneuver (especially from that massive bitch Alyeska, seriously, fuck that guy) as being completely approved by Dalton, and by default, Mike himself.

Meh, their loss.

Pretty much. At least it confirms what I've always thought about Mods at SDN. Not a single one of them have integrity and they're pretty much all useless bitches that no one would give a shit about if not for SDN.

They're just insecure. That's my INTERNET PSYCHOLOGY opinion.

on the other hand we've spent hundreds of pages complaining about TOB in this thread and the previous ones

constant updates of new material

the page count is a bit deceptive cuz of the other chatting in here

hell i made a post with nothing but the password on my luggage reliant's prefix code earlier today

adr wrote:the page count is a bit deceptive cuz of the other chatting in here

hell i made a post with nothing but the password on my luggage reliant's prefix code earlier today

the reliant's prefix code is 12345?

BEN HUR < BEN SISKO

you know i don't actually know if splitting adr's stuff out is all that bad

because theoretically debates are about content and not ulterior motives

but all sportive debate is supposed to rest on the assumption of good faith on the parts of all participants

and if you know that one participant is more interested in just being a dick than being constructive then it isn't unreasonable to extrapolate to the idea that a debate with him will be unproductive

now debating with stupid people or insecure people interested in 'winning' a debate is also unproductive

but the general incoherency of debate policies is another matter

Mr.Coffee wrote:Pretty much. At least it confirms what I've always thought about Mods at SDN. Not a single one of them have integrity and they're pretty much all useless bitches that no one would give a shit about if not for SDN.

Intellectual crucible.