Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Abrupt

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 70
1
Debate & Discuss / Re: already in love=)
« on: September 02, 2012, 12:32:59 pm »Message ID: 598347
I don't feel like getting in a further debate, Abrupt.  In order for there to be a case, you have to have damages.  You are using a pseudonym and voluntarily participating, hence, no damage to any person or firm has occurred.

Regardless of the intricacies of the "quote" function, each post is clearly marked with its author and a reasonable person would not attribute something posted by another user as your opinion.

You can stop posting in the forum, and you wont be "mis-quoted" anymore. 

This will be my last post in this topic.  Further indications that you wish to file suit against FC will be treated seriously, which includes an obligation to freeze your FC account until any/all litigation is settled.

I don't care what you feel like getting into or not, you will satisfy the issue I have or you will put me in contact with someone who can.  You don't seem to realize the point I am making is that your forum is 'clearly' indicating me as the author of the forged quote, regardless of it also indicating the author of the post containing the quote as the author of that post.

I never indicated I wished to file suit against FC and nowhere in my posts can you find such.  I personally did you a favor by making you aware of the vulnerabilities you could face by allowing yourself to become complicit in such forgery/impersonation and I went as far as to hint for you to investigate why other forums expressly do not allow such behavior.  Frankly I am a bit surprised at how dismissive of me you are being and how you are treating me as the bad person here where I was the honorable one and falcon9 was not.  I am also surprised that you would threaten me an act in such an unprofessional manner without more than a half attempt.  Something unusual is going on here and I assure you this is not finished, regardless of what you feel like doing or not doing.


2
Debate & Discuss / Re: already in love=)
« on: September 01, 2012, 07:31:01 pm »Message ID: 597881
Abrupt, I don't see how that section of the Terms of Service is relevant, nor do I agree with your analysis of California law.  Each post is clearly marked with the username of its author.  There is no impersonation going on, and since you are not using a real name (nor business name) I don't believe you'd be able to argue that any meaningful "damages" (in either sense of the word) have occurred.  Your participation here is voluntary and as a private business our only obligation is to run the forums within applicable law, and to my best knowledge, that's exactly what we're doing.  You are welcome to disagree (I assume you will) but I really don't see these more-or-less playful modifications as such an egregious violation.

Thank you for the reply and you are correct to assume that I would disagree as I can be about as stubborn a person as possible.

You may be unclear about the issue I have with the post.  I wouldn't even care so much if someone made a quote and tried to attribute it to me, but the issue here is the person is using your forum features to have it appear to be a genuine quote from me.  For instance, even in this instance where an * is designated (unlike previous times where he has left out the asterisk) is it clear to readers that the resulting post is falsified?

...
add it to ['my']* long list of unfounded assertions and fabrications and downright lies. 
*-corrected for grammar aand proper attribution of adjectives
...

The quoted text highlighted that reads "Quote from: Abrupt on August 31, 2012, 11:56:22 pm" is a forgery and is in essence an impersonation of me.  Granted it is a handle and not actually tied directly to my person (I often forget that as I maintain my honor and integrity and conform to such standards regardless of the medium or anonymity inherent from such methods), but since one of the tenants of this site is honesty can you absolutely guarantee me that there will be no ramifications of my integrity ever being injured from someone reading that as it appears where it claims to be me admitting that I am a liar?  If I posted here claiming that I often lied when filling out surveys and entering in personal information would that not make me subject to be banned from FC?  Can you guarantee that other administrators would not read that and assuming it was actually me having had previously posted the quoted material and thus making me subject for suspicion or even removal?  What about my potential usage of the provided banner for garnering referrals with a reference to a moniker of a person that appears to be admitting to being a liar?

Regarding the legality of the issue, you have said yourself that you are not a lawyer, and neither am I (but I have filed many successful legal proceedings on my own and am not daunted by the language).  With the insanity of liberal legislation it would behoove you to protect yourself and your company against such culpable involvement that stems from the use of your forum features/software to commit forgeries/impersonations.  That you are aware it is a forgery and yet let it stand in such a state is an indefensible position you should never allow yourself to be in.  Many other forums allow the use of handles and quote highlighting features and they have strict stipulations about altering the quoted material (if you just use your own quotes without the highlight features and format they don't have such issue with it).  They consider such a violation to be a ban-able offense and there must be a reason for it.

I am ever an honest person and am not one to tolerate being impugned.  That he is using your forums quote and highlight features to do this is where I have issue.  If you still think such blatant use of your web features to perpetrate such a wrongful act is fine, then perhaps you can be so kind as to put me in contact with Mr. Derheim and we can find his viewpoints on the issue.  With all that being said, I do understand that the forums are something provided for us and that you even allocate benefits from our participation in them and so I don't want to sound unappreciative of such benevolence -- it is just that my honor and dignity is greater than any of that.

3
Debate & Discuss / Re: Let's discuss Christianity versus Atheism (or others)
« on: September 01, 2012, 12:32:09 pm »Message ID: 597668
I could try to put together a list of assumptions for Atheism, but I would rather have y'all do that, and I might compare to what my guess would have been.

That's good of you not to stereotype what you probably know nothing about. Correct atheist assumptions:

* Atheism is the LACK of belief in a god or gods, not the "denial" of these gods' existence (very important)
* Atheists don't "hate" god and are not "mad" at god, nor to they worship the devil...see point above.
* Atheists don't lack morals; in fact, ours are often superior to a religious person's because our morals are based on things that make SENSE (not "some book told me so").
* Atheism isn't a religion; it's the lack of religion, in fact. When nonfundie religious folks are just living their normal lives, being secular, not doing anything religious in the moment...that's how atheists live all the time.

I'm sure there many more I'm forgetting to mention, so consider this the appetizer.

You are incorrect in a few of your points:

Positive Atheists (also called strong/hard) absolutely assert that no god exists.  Negative Atheists (weak/soft) do not believe in the existence of a god, but do not absolutely state there to be none.

Atheism is indeed a religion and has even been recognized as one in US courts (ninth circuit and The Supreme Court to name two).


You make reckless generalizations on others:

Subjective morality is a dangerous thing and leads to such evils as "for the greater good" and "for the good of mankind/country/etc" and things like infanticide and gender based infanticide, redistribution of wealth through forceful theft, etc.  When a person is allowed on their own to decide what is good or bad or a consensus of people are allowed to decide such things there is no end to the horrendous deeds that will follow.  People become numb in time to nearly anything and popular culture often can reflect such a tendency.  I am sure that cannibal tribes never viewed their actions as immoral. 

4
Debate & Discuss / Re: already in love=)
« on: September 01, 2012, 10:56:24 am »Message ID: 597615
@ Administrator

Would this not qualify as a violation of rule ii. from the TOS:

"Users must provide valid and truthful information during all stages of membership at FusionCash. This clause applies to every form of interaction with a FusionCash representative, FusionCash's web properties, and FusionCash's affiliated advertisers and partners, including, but not limited to: personal information, location, support tickets, third-party signup information, and cashouts."

It is absolutely one hundred percent known that the person has used your forum/software and modified the results to display untruthful information and is presenting it as if it were my post.  This is not a religious/anti-religious debate, except that falcon9 has attempted to disqualify me as having validity to evaluate his limitations in mathematics because I expressed being religious in another thread.  He has attempted to label me a 'fundamentalist" and that is what is being debated.  That you suggest to allow greater leniency towards abuse considerations if the subject matter is of a religious nature troubles me.

Are you actually saying here that I can use the quote function and alter the quoted text to make it say anything I wish to?  You are aware of California law on this (I believe you operate under California and these laws although new and expansive in their "Internet Enforcement" laws and still somewhat vague yet partially defined in their "Online Defamation Law" and "Internet Impersonation Law")?  You are aware that there is a reason other forums stipulate that you cannot alter material outlined via use of provided forum "quote functions" except with appropriate use of ellipses that does not modify the meaning in context of the quoted material?

I don't have any problem with "enter at your own risk" and personally I love such freedom, but to falsely attribute a quote to me or to modify my quote to make it appear to say something else is intolerable.  One can call me every name in the book and that doesn't bother me at all but I am strict on honesty and I will not be falsely presented.  I request for you to reconsider your position on this as I am adamant on my stance and I will take every step possible to see this corrected and that I am not defamed.  I do not feel as if I am being unreasonable here and I am somewhat surprised at the ease of your dismissal of this matter considering the seriousness of such an act.

5
Debate & Discuss / Re: debate or discussing
« on: August 31, 2012, 11:56:22 pm »Message ID: 597365
Rather than own your irrational religious faith, you'd prefer to ...

Continue to duck, dodge, dip, dive, deny, and dance ...


Ah, your usual pattern and nothing new.

Either prove your claim ...

I didn't claim you were a self-professed xtian until after  you did.  The evidence is therefore your own initial claim.  If you have other fabricated claims that which wish to falsely attribute to me, (as is your penchant to do), spew them out of the depths of your irrationality. We can just ...

add it to ['my']* long list of unfounded assertions and fabrications and downright lies. 
*-corrected for grammar aand proper attribution of adjectives

You claimed I was a religious fundamentalist.  I have called on you repeatedly to prove that claim and you have spent the last few pages avoiding and obfuscating the issue in your typical trollish method.  I have never professed to be 'xtian' as that is an intentional derogatory remark by you as I am a Christian.  Once again your own words draw you to be the liar.

I have also once again reported you for using the quote function and modifying the results so that it appears as if I posted something other than I did.  I have reported this before on some of your previous times doing this but was told by a moderator that they thought it to be funny and so it was okay to them.  It is not to me, though, and I will not tolerate such abuse and dishonesty.  If this is not addressed this time then I will quote you saying the most vile and disgusting things imaginable and if such gets me banned then so be it.  I will not do this once but repeatedly and every single time you post and so they will have to deal with this issue and with me.

6
Debate & Discuss / Re: debate or discussing
« on: August 31, 2012, 09:35:57 pm »Message ID: 597237
Once again I have repeatedly informed you that you were the one fabricating and not me. 

You can repeatedly lie about that however, repetition won't confer accuracy on your lie.

You should have early on went back and checked the discussion ... Even now you haven't looked back ...

Your presumptions are, as usual, false.  You began your 'Elmer Fudd' pseudo-hunt by pointing out a math error I'd made and adding your own fabrication to it.  There were no claims made in that post, (other than ones inherent to the corrected mathematical results).  Since that point, you've been insisting upon some fabrication while dodging the salient point of the inherent irrationality of religious faith.  Even now, you bob and weave and yet, remain an irrational believer in religious superstitions.
 
Whether I am a Christian or not has no bearing on this as that is not in contestation except ...

Right; it has no bearing except for having a direct bearing on your holding irrational superstitious religious beliefs.

My position on Christianity is rather clear and even someone as ignorant and forgetful and mentally handicapped ...

Being xtian doesn't necessarily require your degree of ignorance or being otherwise mentally handicapped however, it seems to be prevalently-common among many of the followers of that superstition.

And yet whatever inscience you wish to attribute to me, I still manage to handle your asininity rather easily.

No, any mental deficiencies you possess don't require external attribution; especially such false hubris which deludes you into believing that you are 'handling' logic, (rather than any fabricated "asininity" which isn't yours).  That's your 'one-trick-pony', isn't it?  You seem to believe that fabricating a strawman position, attributing to another and then flailing at the false attribution is what "debate" consists of.  Unfortunately, your pattern of making such fabricated attributions a priori assumptions is invalidated by actual logical reasoning, (not that cheap pseudo-logic you keep trying to substitute).

Continue to duck, dodge, dip, dive, deny, and dance all you wish to, Clown Boy as it will avail you nothing.  You are pinned here and you will not weasel your way out of it no matter how you try to.  Either prove your claim or add it to your long list of unfounded assertions and fabrications and downright lies. 

7
Debate & Discuss / Re: debate or discussing
« on: August 31, 2012, 11:31:33 am »Message ID: 596756
Why should I respond to this question considering you never responded to my request for you to prove the initial claim you made? 

Which fabricated claim are you attributing to me to divert from the point this time?

Once again I have repeatedly informed you that you were the one fabricating and not me.  You should have early on went back and checked the discussion and refreshed your memory.  You could have done it on any of 5 or 6 of your last posts as I made it clear that you were obviously missing something and you still are.  You must be aware of your inability to stay focused or keep up with dialogue.  I have certainly made this clear to you on many of your other tirades and I am sure others have also revealed this to you.  If you showed any hint of civility I would have actually quoted your own words back to you once again (considering I already did this once with an additional quote of specificity).  You don't, though, and so I have simply let you dig your own hole.  Even now you haven't looked back and it isn't like there are a lot of pages to look over, and such behavior of yours is simply irrational.

Whether I am a Christian or not has no bearing on this as that is not in contestation except ...

Right; it has no bearing except for having a direct bearing on your holding irrational superstitious religious beliefs.

Your typical ad hominem reply.  Your reliance upon the use of fallacies to argue only reveals your weakness and limited ability to debate rationally.  That you think such usage drives home your point only reveals how remedial you are.  You claim to have experience in debate and yet you cannot see how often you sabotage your own credibility with the frequent use of such obvious irrational devices.

My position on Christianity is rather clear and even someone as ignorant and forgetful and mentally handicapped ...

Being xtian doesn't necessarily require your degree of ignorance or being otherwise mentally handicapped however, it seems to be prevalently-common among many of the followers of that superstition.


And yet whatever inscience you wish to attribute to me, I still manage to handle your asininity rather easily.

8
Debate & Discuss / Re: debate or discussing
« on: August 30, 2012, 06:18:50 pm »Message ID: 596413
Once again you prove your blindness and it is absolutely laughable.  If you are trying to win some biggest idiot award you can quite already since it has never let your mantle.  Your repeated fallacious argument will not distract me from the point and if you had possessed even remedial intellect and comprehension you would have learned that your attempts to change the subject on me will never work.  I cannot decide if you are as stupid as you appear here or your are trying to troll your way out of another of your lies, but it is one of those two.  Please continue your insanity all you want to, but be aware that I have proof in what I say and you do not.  If you don't believe me then quit remaining ignorant and simply reread the exchange you idiot (again I stress this as it is so obvious that you haven't done this).

If you're done talking to yourself in your mirror now, will you either confirm or deny that you've claimed to be xtian, (or continue your irrational diversions)? 

Why should I respond to this question considering you never responded to my request for you to prove the initial claim you made?  You have been running scared since I challenged you on that point and trying to obfuscate and deflect back upon me some unchallenged assertion of yours.  I am not quite as ignorant as you are, though, and thus am not distracted at all.

Whether I am a Christian or not has no bearing on this as that is not in contestation except in your imagination (and I am not even talking about your intentionally derogatory usage of the word 'xtian' -- which is something I have never claimed to be but may or may not have denied being.  My position on Christianity is rather clear and even someone as ignorant and forgetful and mentally handicapped as you should have no problems knowing what it is -- I say should but you often prove yourself well below the bar even with things that are readily apparent. 

So are you ever going to prove your initial claim that I challenged or are you going to continue running around in your schoolgirl uniform, calling me 'daddy' and begging for a spanking?

9
Debate & Discuss / Re: debate or discussing
« on: August 30, 2012, 05:25:36 pm »Message ID: 596396
Your fabrications are irrelevant.   Now, back to the point you keep trying to evade; you've claimed to be a xtian.  Either you are one or, not.  There's no fallacy involved there unless your initial claim was false.

I am not evading any point.  

Then you're either a liar or a moron, (or both). The point isn't what you want to change it to, it remains that you're either a self-professed xtian or, you're not.  Since you've already made this claim before, it can used as a premise for your holding an irrational religious faith, (which is belief sans evidence).  Continued evasions of this point, (as opposed to any speciously fabricated non-points your irrationality hucks-up), will be disregarded.

Once again you prove your blindness and it is absolutely laughable.  If you are trying to win some biggest idiot award you can quite already since it has never let your mantle.  Your repeated fallacious argument will not distract me from the point and if you had possessed even remedial intellect and comprehension you would have learned that your attempts to change the subject on me will never work.  I cannot decide if you are as stupid as you appear here or your are trying to troll your way out of another of your lies, but it is one of those two.  Please continue your insanity all you want to, but be aware that I have proof in what I say and you do not.  If you don't believe me then quit remaining ignorant and simply reread the exchange you idiot (again I stress this as it is so obvious that you haven't done this).

10
Debate & Discuss / Re: debate or discussing
« on: August 30, 2012, 02:14:39 pm »Message ID: 596321
... you're either a xtian or you're not and dodging the question doesn't answer it.

Wow, another fallacy from you.  

Simply claiming fallacies without substantiating your false claims does not make them accurate accusations.  It does make them lies, coming from an established complusive/pathological liar.  Now, back to the point you keep trying to evade; you've claimed to be a xtian.  Either you are one or, not.  There's no fallacy involved there unless your initial claim was false.

I would explain them to you, but you wouldn't likely understand even then.  

Your fabrications are irrelevant.   Now, back to the point you keep trying to evade; you've claimed to be a xtian.  Either you are one or, not.  There's no fallacy involved there unless your initial claim was false.

I am not evading any point.  As I previously stated it is you who is guilty of this.  You don't even know what the argument is and you are fabricating/hallucinating some other point in an attempt to try and obfuscate.  Well your obfuscation has worked -- on yourself -- as it is you who got distracted.  I have remained entirely focused and on point and this didn't even involve any keen concentration as it is so obvious -- yet in your typical fashion you fall short here and you cannot keep up.  One might think I should enjoy tremendously the idiocy of your blind ignorance, but the truth is your are so incapable and inept as to make it entirely too easy and thus without any thrill of victory for me.  Remember, it is you who consistently displays the inability to focus and keep up and I have always been resolute in this fashion, and so I suggest you reread and study this thread (take notes if such is necessary considering your less than remedial qualities) until you can understand what it is your blindness is withholding from you.

Note:  It is okay with me if you get someone to help you in this.  If you finally understand it, they can even give you a gold star to stick upon whatever/wherever it is you would wish to display your progress.

11
Debate & Discuss / Re: debate or discussing (was Re: already in love=)
« on: August 30, 2012, 01:28:54 pm »Message ID: 596299
No, you're either a xtian or you're not and dodging the question doesn't answer it.

Wow, another fallacy from you.   

Simply claiming fallacies without substantiating your false claims does not make them accurate accusations.  It does make them lies, coming from an established complusive/pathological liar.  Now, back to the point you keep trying to evade; you've claimed to be a xtian.  Either you are one or, not.  There's no fallacy involved there unless your initial claim was false.

I would explain them to you, but you wouldn't likely understand even then.  You are the one evading the point or possibly because you are off your medication and you cannot even remember your argument that I challenged you to prove.  This is one of the reasons you are so comical and easy to debate -- your inability to focus and comprehend.  Your blindness is quite obvious and that you accuse others of this makes you quite the hypocritical fool.

12
Debate & Discuss / Re: already in love=)
« on: August 30, 2012, 12:59:24 pm »Message ID: 596283
You have committed such an obvious fallacy with this reasoning ... 

No, you're either a xtian or you're not and dodging the question doesn't answer it.

Wow, another fallacy from you.  If you cannot match my pace then you should get out of the race as I am not going to go easy on you simply because you are handicapped.

13
Debate & Discuss / Re: already in love=)
« on: August 30, 2012, 11:06:12 am »Message ID: 596178
You have so many errors here that I will not address them ...

So, you're not a self-professed xtian anymore?  What now, a pseudo-satanist?

You have committed such an obvious fallacy with this reasoning that I must wonder if you even still try anymore.  I suppose such a revelation into your limited thought process helps us all to understand why it is you are so often wrong.

14
Off-Topic / Re: RNC
« on: August 30, 2012, 11:00:30 am »Message ID: 596176
Don't be afraid of the monster in your closet.  If you would look you may realize it is only a sturdy overcoat that would protect you from the harsh elements.

Your statement basically implies that you have been convinced to be afraid of anything that was said there by people who so badly want to frighten you that they would not want you to watch it for fear that you may vote for that party instead of the one using such scare tactics against you.

15
Debate & Discuss / Re: already in love=)
« on: August 30, 2012, 01:08:56 am »Message ID: 596031
If such is true you should be able to prove your claim, or are we to take your word on faith?

You've already professed holding xtian beliefs.  Since such are based upon blind faith and not factual evidence, they are inherently irrational.  Irrational religious beliefs are a hallmark of fundamentalists.

You have so many errors here that I will not address them all but will focus on one key word 'fundamentalists'.  It is obvious that you do not understand the meaning of the word based upon your usage and your frequent dispersions of it.  How can you pretend to have any understanding or ability to label another when you yourself do not understand the labels you sling about?  Ignorance upon ignorance is what you reveal -- and you do it in such a way that one might think it were deliberate self humiliation had you but any character.  You truly are the dancing clown boy and you have built yourself a mighty stage to deliver your shows from.

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 70