View Full Version : A new thread for Yoda to voice his irrational gripes against me.
Yoda:
A word of genuine advice: you will not regain the respect you so utterly lost site-wide by dodging accountability and refusing to discuss the (valid) gripes people have with you. It is only by owning up to your mistakes and altering your behavior for the better that you'll be afforded the kind of consideration you so rabidly demand.
Using this totally bizarre logic, Yoda justifies sabotaging all my threads of discussion with his hostile and irrelevant comments.
Point is, Yoda/Chris, you may be the owner of this forum, but that doesn't give you the right to sabotage legitimate threads of discussion simply because you happen to have political disagreements with the guy who started them (namely, myself), any more than you have the right to arbitrarily delete his threads or modify his posts. Of course, you have the power to do so, since this is your forum, but I have no idea what that sort of effect that kind of despotic conduct will have on your credibility!
Anyway, just to prove to you that all your hostile allegations against me are totally unfounded (which is to say, completely UNTRUE) and that your hostility against me is either politically motivated or else completely irrational, I have started this thread for you to voice your claims/allegations/objections against me so that you will cease from sabotaging my threads of legitimate discussion with your irrelevant remarks.
This is in the interest of fostering a constructive atmosphere on this forum, in which CONSTRUCTIVE discussion, debate and exchange of ideas are encouraged, as opposed to puerile name-calling, juvenile pranks, senseless hostility and a negative atmosphere of personal attacks and hatred.
Let all the members of the MoFo forums bear witness to the initiative I have taken to settle this feud that Yoda has against me once and for all!
The floor is yours, Yoda, if you will . . .
Originally posted by Django
I have started this thread for you to voice your claims/allegations/objections against me
Gladly.
After encountering a database error, you scrapped together an irate email stating things like...
"I am really angry with this sort of high-handed treatment! I have the right to participate in your forum and you have no right to block my from accessing it. I demand an explanation."
You apologized shortly afterwards, but this demonstration of mental instability was only the beginning...
You got into an argument about General Patton in which you equated him with -- among others -- Hitler. You were pressured to support this statement repeatedly, prompting you to state "Hey, I don't have to prove anything!" Shortly afterwards, Cait debunked your claims about the timing of Patton's dismissal...claims you apparently made without any real knowledge of the facts.
You responded by claiming you didn't have time to verify the robust arguments put against you. You then proceeded to post over 30 times over the next several days. You also posted several times in that very same thread, never addressing the arguments you claim you had no time for. These were to be merely the first examples of your penchant for dishonesty.
You stated you were going to leave at LEAST twice. Clearly, you didn't make good on either promise. What's more, you've claimed to give no consideration to what I or anyone think, stating, for example, the following:
"Incidentally, I don't feel in the least humiliated! Why should I, when a retarded clown like you bans me from a half-witted forum populated by provincial idiots from some deadbeat village in the middle of who-knows-where?"
Puzzlingly, you've been unable to brush aside us half-witted idiots for more than a week at a time.
You started a bizarre poll to gauge your popularity. Not a big deal, but after winning by something like 2 votes, you began viewing yourself as a democratically elected forum leader. What you convienently ignored was that a) your biggest detractors abstained out of contempt for the poll's very existence and b) the poll only inquired as to whether or not you ought to leave. A number of people who didn't think much of you voted "no" because very few of us want any of the others to leave, no matter how much we disagree with them.
After laying claim to majority support time after time, another poll was posted which asked not "should Django stay or go?" but "do you enjoy Django's presence?" The results were nothing short of definitive. Naturally, you responded by screaming conspiracy...dedicating a couple threads to the matter. The problem with this was simple: I couldn't fake the results without it being obvious to people who did not, in fact, vote the way the poll indicated. To this day not a single person has stepped up to assert that their vote was changed or tallied inaccurately.
After suffering a rather humiliating exposure at the hands of Jason and his net sleuthing skills, you went on hiatus. You returned before long though under an alias: Vlad, I believe it was. Your true identity was exposed almost immediately, but you denied it. Eventually you were banned and told to use your original username if you wanted to post.
Instead, you proceeded to create several other usernames with much the same agenda. You also wrote a couple of quasi-threatening emails in response to your bannings stating things like "It just goes to show that you are a small-minded moron with no balls!" Following that, you created another username (jackfrost) under which you (poorly) pretended to be someone else entirely...this alter ego remains your only steadfast supporter.
You referred to federal statistics as "obscure" and implied that statistics in general were misleading. However, you've used statistics a number of times to support your claims -- sometimes in the same post as one of your tirades against them. Even worse: you attempted to cast skepticism and doubt over a particular statistic (unemployment), but shortly afterwards used that same statistic to support one of your claims.
Oh, and you insinuated that your personal experience was a more accurate economic barometer than data from the US Department of Labor.
You called any claim you haven't verified "dubious." The problem with this is that you never verify claims...even your own. This policy, by definition, makes your own claims "dubious" as well. When this was pointed out, you responded by saying that your claims didn't need any verification, as they were so obvious. You were then asked to demonstrate their validity, which should be easy, were they as obvious as you claimed. You ignored this request more than once, making various excuses...some about time, despite the fact that you spent far more time repeating yourself than it would have taken to investigate the matter as you were asked to.
You have made the following claims, all of which have been (or can be) refuted with cold hard facts. Unemployment is "going through the roof" (fact: unemployment is at the 30-year average)
The cost of war was substantial (fact: the war is one of the cheapest in our history; your guesstimate was 10 times too high)
Bush's deficit is record-breaking (fact: it's not. Nor is it even particularly large when compared to past deficits)
I have sabotaged you (fact: you've been unable to name a single person who I or Silver has maliciously caused to dislike you)
You have posted about movies many times (fact: when you made the statement, you hardly had at all. When this was shown to you, you failed to admit you were wrong. You went on a useless image-posting spree shortly afterwards)
The war is an indirect way for Bush to pay off his campaign donors in the defense industry (fact: you've yet to provide a single company name or statistic to support this)
Bush has slashed (or plans to slash) Veterans Benefits (fact: he's raised them massively every year since taking office)To date, you've only admitted error in regards to the Veterans Benefits issue.Most of that's off the top of my head.
Originally posted by Yoda
Gladly.
After encountering a database error, you scrapped together an irate email stating things like...
You apologized shortly afterwards, but this demonstration of mental instability was only the beginning...
How does that qualify as mental instability? I was under the impression that I had been blocked from accessing the forum, hence my email of complaint. I apologized after I was convinced that it was, indeed a database error.
Originally posted by Yoda
You got into an argument about General Patton in which you equated him with -- among others -- Hitler. You were pressured to support this statement repeatedly, prompting you to state "Hey, I don't have to prove anything!" Shortly afterwards, Cait debunked your claims about the timing of Patton's dismissal...claims you apparently made without any real knowledge of the facts.
You responded by claiming you didn't have time to verify the robust arguments put against you. You then proceeded to post over 30 times over the next several days. You also posted several times in that very same thread, never addressing the arguments you claim you had no time for. These were to be merely the first examples of your penchant for dishonesty.
Well, first of all, my claims regarding Patton were dead-on. Caitlyn made a strong case to support her claims, but I really don't think that she adequately addressed the points I raised. I may have made a few minor errors in my facts, primarily because I did not have the time to do adequate research at the time--that, I admit. But I don't think that Caitlyn successfully refuted the points I made about Patton's actions during WWII. In the end, I conceded the debate only because it had become a sensitive issue and because of Caitlyn's personal tragedy suffered during 9/11--I didn't think it was the right time to continue harping on a sensitive issue like that.
Your continued allegation that I have displayed a "penchant for dishonesty" is completely absurd. It's one thing to make offhand posts in between one's work, quite another thing to do extensive research and formulate a detailed argument related to an in-depth debate. Like I said, at the time, I didn't have time to do the latter, but I did have the time to make occasional comments here and there. Posting 30 short posts over a period of "several days" hardly qualifies as a great deal of activity. Consequently, your claim that I am dishonest is completely fallacious. Another example of the outrageous allegations you have baselessly levelled against me time and again.
Originally posted by Yoda
You stated you were going to leave at LEAST twice. Clearly, you didn't make good on either promise. What's more, you've claimed to give no consideration to what I or anyone think, stating, for example, the following:
Puzzlingly, you've been unable to brush aside us half-witted idiots for more than a week at a time.
I'm sorry--where exactly did I say that? Please check your sources. Can you please tell me where you got that quote from? Yes, I did say I was going to stop posting in the forum for awhile--both times, I left the forum, like I had said, for awhile. I returned after awhile. I did not say how long I was going to leave, did I? I don't see what the deal is here. I said I was going to leave for awhile, and I did leave for awhile. Case closed.
Originally posted by Yoda
You started a bizarre poll to gauge your popularity. Not a big deal, but after winning by something like 2 votes, you began viewing yourself as a democratically elected forum leader. What you convienently ignored was that a) your biggest detractors abstained out of contempt for the poll's very existence and b) the poll only inquired as to whether or not you ought to leave. A number of people who didn't think much of you voted "no" because very few of us want any of the others to leave, no matter how much we disagree with them.
:laugh: This remark convinces me that you are either out of your mind or else extremely insecure in your position of authority. I never once considered myself a "democratically elected leader"! I simply made a few facetious comments following the result of the poll, which I took to be an encouraging show of support for my continuance on the forum. Basically, I did not wish to continue in the face of an overwhelming consensus that wanted me to leave. As of now, I am convinced that most people don't mind me staying around--it's just you and your little group of friends who seem to be antagonistic towards me, primarily for political reasons, it seems.
Originally posted by Yoda
After laying claim to majority support time after time, another poll was posted which asked not "should Django stay or go?" but "do you enjoy Django's presence?" The results were nothing short of definitive. Naturally, you responded by screaming conspiracy...dedicating a couple threads to the matter. The problem with this was simple: I couldn't fake the results without it being obvious to people who did not, in fact, vote the way the poll indicated. To this day not a single person has stepped up to assert that their vote was changed or tallied inaccurately.
Well, first of all, my claims of majority support were hardly serious. Secondly, the second poll, if not explicitly rigged (and I have grave doubts about its authenticity) came at the wake of a hate campaign on your part and, esp., on the part of Silver Bullet, which involved editing my posts and deleting my threads, all designed, obviously, to make me unpopular and look bad. Hence, the negative results of the second poll. Essentially, I had posted a thread of explanation of my side of the story on the day you created your poll, which was conveniently deleted. If that isn't fishy, what is?
Originally posted by Yoda
After suffering a rather humiliating exposure at the hands of Jason and his net sleuthing skills, you went on hiatus. You returned before long though under an alias: Vlad, I believe it was. Your true identity was exposed almost immediately, but you denied it. Eventually you were banned and told to use your original username if you wanted to post.
Instead, you proceeded to create several other usernames with much the same agenda. You also wrote a couple of quasi-threatening emails in response to your bannings stating things like "It just goes to show that you are a small-minded moron with no balls!" Following that, you created another username (jackfrost) under which you (poorly) pretended to be someone else entirely...this alter ego remains your only steadfast supporter.
A humiliating exposure at the hands of Jason, the gay sleuth? :laugh: That's new to me! When exactly did this happen? Can you prove anything about this alternate identity nonsense? Or are these more paranoid delusions on your part?
Originally posted by Yoda
You referred to federal statistics as "obscure" and implied that statistics in general were misleading. However, you've used statistics a number of times to support your claims -- sometimes in the same post as one of your tirades against them. Even worse: you attempted to cast skepticism and doubt over a particular statistic (unemployment), but shortly afterwards used that same statistic to support one of your claims.
Oh, and you insinuated that your personal experience was a more accurate economic barometer than data from the US Department of Labor.
All I did was quote Benjamin Disraeli, who said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics." My point is that statistics can be used to prove anything and were misleading, in this case, insofar as they trivialized the gravity of the situation, making it appear less serious than it actually was. Regarding unemployment statistics, where did I cast doubt over that one? I clearly stated what they were and effectively used them to make my point--a 4% increase in unemployment involving the loss of so many millions of jobs in the private sector. How can you fault me for my use of that factual statistic? Regarding my personal experience, what I said was that I know what I can see with my eyes and read about in the news, as opposed to cold, clinical federal statistics which claim the opposite. I denied the veracity of statistics insofar as they invalidated my personal experience. You, on the other hand, coldly dismissed my own personal testimony as circumstantial evidence (or whatever the terminology you used). I guess I was speaking more from my heart and personal experiences, whereas you were taking the cold, clinical, mechanistic approach that federal statistics prove everything. Well, if that's the case, so be it! I know what I saw and experienced for myself!
Originally posted by Yoda
You called any claim you haven't verified "dubious." The problem with this is that you never verify claims...even your own. This policy, by definition, makes your own claims "dubious" as well. When this was pointed out, you responded by saying that your claims didn't need any verification, as they were so obvious. You were then asked to demonstrate their validity, which should be easy, were they as obvious as you claimed. You ignored this request more than once, making various excuses...some about time, despite the fact that you spent far more time repeating yourself than it would have taken to investigate the matter as you were asked to.
Well, I questioned the veracity of your claims because I wasn't aware of the sources. My own claims (the ones you are referring to) were not extracted from obscure sources--rather, they were statements of self-evident fact. In logic (your favorite ball game) there is such a thing as the self-evident fact. Try re-reading your books on logic. Regarding my "excuses about time"--I don't see why that is so difficult to believe. Like I said, at the time, I did not have the time to conduct the extensive research required to make an in-depth case. I wasn't surfing the net and posting on an online message board to be bothered with legalistic nonsense. I was here to have some fun, and I can't be bothered with the doing in-depth research on every godforsaken little item of trivia that you feel compelled to question, in your ceaseless, monotonous cross-examination of everything I say!
Originally posted by Yoda
You have made the following claims, all of which have been (or can be) refuted with cold hard facts.
Unemployment is "going through the roof" (fact: unemployment is at the 30-year average)[/B]
Well, at the time, there were no indications that the unemployment situation was improving--layoffs were continuing and people were living in fear of losing their jobs at any time. Hence my remark, "unemployment is GOING through the roof," was accurate.
Originally posted by Yoda
The cost of war was substantial (fact: the war is one of the cheapest in our history; your guesstimate was 10 times too high)
My guess might have been off, but the cost of war, even if it was so "cheap", was still very substantial. How many billions did you say it was?
Originally posted by Yoda
Bush's deficit is record-breaking (fact: it's not. Nor is it even particularly large when compared to past deficits)
Well, considering that we have been experiencing record-breaking surpluses of late, the statistics belie the fact that we have made a very substantial, if not enormous drop, from a huge surplus to an average deficit. That's what I meant by record-breaking--not so much the actual numbers, but the loss.
Originally posted by Yoda
I have sabotaged you (fact: you've been unable to name a single person who I or Silver has maliciously caused to dislike you)
Oh, come on! You have been systematically been engaging in a campaign of hostility against me that has made me unpopular and damaged my reputation on this forum, turning most of my friends against me! How can you deny these facts with a straight face? Not unless you are a barefaced liar! Anyway, to cite examples of tactics employed or sanctioned by you: a) Deletion of my threads; b) Editing of my posts; c) Racial slurs; d) Biased mismanagement, bordering on favoritism, if not explicitly so; e) Twisting and distorting my comments way out of context and intentionally putting a negative spin on everything I say; f) Relentlessly hounding me with nitpicky arguments over trivialities; g) Spamming my threads with irrelevant comments which disrupt the discussion underway; h) Barefacedly lying about me on numerous occasions; i) Maliciously making unfounded, baseless allegations against me based either on a complete misinterpretation of my remarks, which are taken way out of context, or else base on completely fictitious lies and fabrications; j) Contriving all manner of fallacious gripes against me (case in point, your post above), all of which I have completely refuted, and k) Unwittingly admitting, on certain occasions, to your own premeditated hostility towards me and your implicit or explicit engagement of a campaign of hatred against me.
Originally posted by Yoda
You have posted about movies many times (fact: when you made the statement, you hardly had at all. When this was shown to you, you failed to admit you were wrong. You went on a useless image-posting spree shortly afterwards)
:laugh: "Image-posting spree"--that is such utter nonsense! True, I often post images, to communicate my points more effectively. But to suggest that the primary reason for my "image-posting sprees" has been to raise my quotient of posts in the non-intermission threads is absurd! As it happens, the vast majority of my intermission threads were related either to: a) the politics of the time, during a politically particularly sensitive time (which, I think, excuses the interest in politics) and b) To refuting your endless cross-examinations and nitpicky arguments against everything I had to say. As such, I wasn't able to get round to posting as much as I would have liked on the other threads. The fact that I have since then, proves my point!
Originally posted by Yoda
The war is an indirect way for Bush to pay off his campaign donors in the defense industry (fact: you've yet to provide a single company name or statistic to support this)
I did quote news articles which clearly demonstrated GOP interests. I did not bother to do any further research because, in my opinion, the facts cited in the article so obviously implicate Bush in his implicit collaboration with arms-dealers that my claims require no further substantiation. Furthermore, like I have said on numerous occasions, this happens to be a movie forum which I surf on at my leisure. Consequently, I do not have the time or inclination to spend all my time researching every issue you raise, for your benefit. The evidence I provided substantiated my claim sufficiently.
Originally posted by Yoda
Bush has slashed (or plans to slash) Veterans Benefits (fact: he's raised them massively every year since taking office)[/list]To date, you've only admitted error in regards to the Veterans Benefits issue.[/list]Most of that's off the top of my head.
I cited the news article which led me to believe what I claimed. You claimed that the article was mistaken. I only conceded this point to you on the assumption that your statistics and claims were accurate. Again, this is a movie forum, and I don't have the time or inclination to spend all my time researching pointless trivia.
To sum up, Yoda/Chris, you have only succeeded in proving that your gripes against me are COMPLETELY ABSURD!!! You don't have a leg to stand on! Your claims are as hollow as your hollow leg (the one you don't have to stand on)! My suggestion to you--get real! You have only demonstrated to me the extent of your paranoia and insecurities! This is, ultimately, only a movie forum--you are taking everything in here way too seriously! Get a life, bozo! Get real! Wake up to reality and stop wasting my time with your crappy nonsense! I visit this forum to chat with acquaintances and friends and post material on stuff that interests me and exchange ideas with interested and interesting people! Not to waste all my time humoring you and your penchant for a deconstructive analysis of every triviality that happens to cross your path! I don't have time to waste over pointless trivia! I have way more important things to do than spend my time listening to your endless, monotonous, droning lectures over this, that and the other, nitpicking and fault-finding over every darn thing like some chaperone from hell! Get out of my face and start DOING YOUR JOB like you should--i.e. start MANAGING THE FORUM for a change and stop relentlessly hounding me and complaining about every little thing I say!
Caitlyn
06-19-03, 03:19 AM
Originally posted by Django
How does that qualify as mental instability? I was under the impression that I had been blocked from accessing the forum, hence my email of complaint. I apologized after I was convinced that it was, indeed a database error.
Any rational person would have asked first instead of automatically jumping to the conclusion they had been banned… that is unless they had in fact been banned numerous times from other forums…
Well, first of all, my claims regarding Patton were dead-on.
Your claims regarding Patton were and still are just your opinions…
Caitlyn made a strong case to support her claims, but I really don't think that she adequately addressed the points I raised.
What point was that… your delusional claim that General Patton was a worse monster then Hitler or Osama Bin Laden…
I may have made a few minor errors in my facts, primarily because I did not have the time to do adequate research at the time--that, I admit. But I don't think that Caitlyn successfully refuted the points I made about Patton's actions during WWII.
A few minor errors… You know I really think if someone shot you in the head, the bullet would just bounce off or if it did manage to penetrate… the sound would be similar to that of a marble in an empty cardboard box when you shake it…
In the end, I conceded the debate only because it had become a sensitive issue and because of Caitlyn's personal tragedy suffered during 9/11--I didn't think it was the right time to continue harping on a sensitive issue like that.
The fact of the matter is, you conceded before you even knew I had lost anyone on 9/11...
Anyway, if anyone is even interested in any of this arguement (which I highly doubt) they can read every word of it HERE (http://www.movieforums.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3581&perpage=15&pagenumber=1)
Revenge of Mr M
06-19-03, 06:49 AM
When did Yoda "lose respect site-wide"? I must have missed that one. Or maybe you're fabricating claims...
r3port3r66
06-19-03, 03:05 PM
Uhg! Not again! Django, it seems if you are not in the center of everyone's attention, you are not happy at all. Good thing Chris is here to feed your ego. Although, I don't think he engages you because he thinks your worth engaging, I think he may only debate with you because he's bored, and, let's face it, you're easy. But, no matter how hard you try we can all see right through you, and no matter what you do, nothing will change our opinion about you. That's not to say I don't like you, I do. I think you are a great debator, one who stands up for himself and injustice. But a great debator also needs to know how to lose gracefully. I mean if someone who constantly loses a race, yet refuses to think he has lost and continues running, he'll only end up running in circles. A sign of vanity. Are you so in love with yourself that you constantly like reading your own words, on the same topic, over and over and over and over and over and over and over again? Django?
I have a few questions for you: Please make your answers as short as possible:
Why do you continue to engage Chris in debate when you know exactly how he feels?
Why are you a member of a movie forums website?
Do you like talking about the same things over and over again?
Do you know when to concede?
Other than movies, what other forum sites do you belong to, and what do you talk about there(If you wish, give us the address to these sites and your username so that we may verify that you actually talk about the site topic.)?
What is it that satisfies you when you egg people on and make them angry? Do you get a "kick" when people call you names out of frustration because they cannot confront you face-to-face? Ever been in a fist fight? Wait, don't tell me--you hate violence right?
Are you bored with your life?
Sexy Celebrity
06-19-03, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by Django
A humiliating exposure at the hands of Jason, the gay sleuth? :laugh:
Oh, just call me Sherlock Homos. You should come get a job with me. You can be Harriet the Spy.
Originally posted by Caitlyn
Any rational person would have asked first instead of automatically jumping to the conclusion they had been banned that is unless they had in fact been banned numerous times from other forums
Well, whatever the reason I jumped to that conclusion, as a matter of record, no, I have never been banned from any forum.
Originally posted by Caitlyn
Your claims regarding Patton were and still are just your opinions
Opinions backed with good reasons.
Originally posted by Caitlyn
What point was that? your delusional claim that General Patton was a worse monster then Hitler or Osama Bin Laden?
No, my point that Patton was a controversial historical figure who went too far, possibly losing his head.
Originally posted by Caitlyn
A few minor errors You know I really think if someone shot you in the head, the bullet would just bounce off or if it did manage to penetrate the sound would be similar to that of a marble in an empty cardboard box when you shake it
Whatever . . .
Originally posted by Caitlyn
The fact of the matter is, you conceded before you even knew I had lost anyone on 9/11...
Did I? Well, in any case, the reason I conceded is because I grew tired of the endless debate and because it was too sensitive an issue to continue with at the time. Not because I was convinced.
Originally posted by Revenge of Mr M
When did Yoda "lose respect site-wide"? I must have missed that one. Or maybe you're fabricating claims...
I'm sorry? You've lost me there.
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Uhg! Not again! Django, it seems if you are not in the center of everyone's attention, you are not happy at all. Good thing Chris is here to feed your ego. Although, I don't think he engages you because he thinks your worth engaging, I think he may only debate with you because he's bored, and, let's face it, you're easy. But, no matter how hard you try we can all see right through you, and no matter what you do, nothing will change our opinion about you. That's not to say I don't like you, I do. I think you are a great debator, one who stands up for himself and injustice. But a great debator also needs to know how to lose gracefully. I mean if someone who constantly loses a race, yet refuses to think he has lost and continues running, he'll only end up running in circles. A sign of vanity. Are you so in love with yourself that you constantly like reading your own words, on the same topic, over and over and over and over and over and over and over again? Django?
Reporter, the only reason I started this thread was to confront Yoda once and for all and address the issues he had against me in one go. Yoda was busy sabotaging all my threads of discussion by posting his endless gripes against me--cluttering up my threads and distracting from the issues under discussion. That's what led me to create a new thread. I have no interest in continuing this endless debate with Yoda at all, but as long as he persists in hounding me with his irrelevant criticism, I have no choice except to bring this issue to the forefront. I am completely prepared to put all this behind me and carry on. It all comes down to Yoda--is he prepared to get on with his life and leave me alone? Whether I won or lost the past debates don't bother me in the least--what concerns me is that Yoda continues to hound me and sabotage my threads. That's what I feel compelled to deal with here. Thanks, incidentally, for the positive and supportive comments you made about me--I appreciate it.
Originally posted by r3port3r66
I have a few questions for you: Please make your answers as short as possible:
Why do you continue to engage Chris in debate when you know exactly how he feels?
See above
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Why are you a member of a movie forums website?
To discuss movies and other issues of interest to me.
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Do you like talking about the same things over and over again?
Not me, personally--however, if my opponents insist on repeating themselves, I have no choice except to reply to their comments.
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Do you know when to concede?
Sure, and I have on numerous occasions.
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Other than movies, what other forum sites do you belong to, and what do you talk about there(If you wish, give us the address to these sites and your username so that we may verify that you actually talk about the site topic.)?
No other forums, at present.
Originally posted by r3port3r66
What is it that satisfies you when you egg people on and make them angry? Do you get a "kick" when people call you names out of frustration because they cannot confront you face-to-face? Ever been in a fist fight? Wait, don't tell me--you hate violence right?
I don't get a kick out of people's antagonism towards me, nor do I intentionally seek to provoke anyone. If someone has a gripe against me, though, I feeled compelled to confront it, if I cannot, as a matter of choice, ignore it (which would be my preferred course of action).
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Are you bored with your life?
Far from it--I have too many concerns, at present, to be bored.
r3port3r66
06-19-03, 03:54 PM
Django, let's just say, you crack me up! :laugh:
A part of me thinks that your sense of humor has been stiffled for some reason. Rest assured though, you're a funny guy! :laugh:
...you know what I mean.
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Django, let's just say, you crack me up! :laugh:
A part of me thinks that your sense of humor has been stiffled for some reason. Rest assured though, you're a funny guy! :laugh:
...you know what I mean.
I have a sense of humor, but I fail to see the humor in this situation.
Caitlyn
06-19-03, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by Django
cluttering up my threads and distracting from the issues under discussion.
For the record… a post by Django in the Hulk thread has been deleted by me due to the fact it dealt with Django‘s supposed sexual preferences which have absolutely nothing to do with the movie Hulk and was in fact nothing more then distracting clutter…
r3port3r66
06-19-03, 04:22 PM
You go girl!
I was wondering about that post in The Hulk thread by Django: it had no reason to be there whatsoever, other than to provoke a solution that will ultimately lead to another outburst of discontent. What do you say about that Uday? Why?
Sexy Celebrity
06-19-03, 04:39 PM
I missed that. What did it say?
Originally posted by Caitlyn
For the record… a post by Django in the Hulk thread has been deleted by me due to the fact it dealt with Django‘s supposed sexual preferences which have absolutely nothing to do with the movie Hulk and was in fact nothing more then distracting clutter…
Originally posted by r3port3r66
You go girl!
I was wondering about that post in The Hulk thread by Django: it had no reason to be there whatsoever, other than to provoke a solution that will ultimately lead to another outburst of discontent. What do you say about that Uday? Why?
Okay, I apologize--it was out of context.
As it happens, Yoda is currently sporting the following tag line:
Yoda:
SILVER: I have a unique mind, and Chris has sex with Uday.
YODA: It started out as a simple arrangement. He just needed a green card, but somewhere along the way, we forgot it was all an act.
My post was a response to Yoda's tag-line, which looked like the body of the post to me. Anyway, I will repost that response here, insofar as I can remember what I said. It goes something like this:
:laugh: LOL! I always knew that I was irresistable to women, but . . .
Yoda, Silver Bullet, keep on fantasizing! It's never going to happen. As it happens, I like girls way too much to give them up.
Incidentally, Chris and Matt, considering how intimate the two of you are on this forum, maybe you should consider getting together. You could spend a long, happy life in each other's arms! Besides, you'd make a cute couple! LOL! :D :laugh:
How does that qualify as mental instability? I was under the impression that I had been blocked from accessing the forum, hence my email of complaint. I apologized after I was convinced that it was, indeed a database error.
Aside from being paranoid as hell, it's one helluva massive overreaction even if you HAD been blocked from accessing the site.
Well, first of all, my claims regarding Patton were dead-on. Caitlyn made a strong case to support her claims, but I really don't think that she adequately addressed the points I raised.
The only points you raised were that Patton trash talked with the best of them, and was relieved of command at some point. You ultimately revealed that you did not know why or when he was dismissed...but you merely speculated that the reason must've been so horrible so as to equate him with an instigator of genocide. You more or less admitted to knowing nothing beyond that, and as such, you never came anywhere near justifying your original accusation.
It's one thing to make offhand posts in between one's work, quite another thing to do extensive research and formulate a detailed argument related to an in-depth debate.
Firstly, these discussions rarely require "extensive research." I do not generally invest loads of time into preparing my posts. Most are written more or less on the fly.
Secondly, quit diving headfirst into political arguments if you're unwilling (or -- more likely -- unable) to support anything you say. You only get bothered when you come bounding at some controversial topic with fabricated claims.
Like I said, at the time, I didn't have time to do the latter, but I did have the time to make occasional comments here and there. Posting 30 short posts over a period of "several days" hardly qualifies as a great deal of activity.
It doesn't have to be a great deal of activity. Just enough to show that you weren't lacking the time to actually substantiate your arguments for once. You simply CHOSE not to.
I'm sorry--where exactly did I say that? Please check your sources. Can you please tell me where you got that quote from?
An email from you dated April 30th, 9:33 PM. I can only assume that, confronted with it, you'll offer a stern denial. I can post the entire email dialogue if necessary.
Basically, I did not wish to continue in the face of an overwhelming consensus that wanted me to leave. As of now, I am convinced that most people don't mind me staying around--it's just you and your little group of friends who seem to be antagonistic towards me, primarily for political reasons, it seems.
You're still not getting the point: most of us don't want you to LEAVE...we want you to CHANGE. Most of us do not like you, but we're mature enough not to demand the departure of those we dislike.
And for God's sake, please get off the "I'm being persecuted for political reasons!" kick. If this were about your politics, a number of other regulars here would've fallen victim as well...but they haven't. Martrydom doesn't work when a dozen other people are espousing the same cause without reproach.
Secondly, the second poll, if not explicitly rigged (and I have grave doubts about its authenticity) came at the wake of a hate campaign on your part and, esp., on the part of Silver Bullet, which involved editing my posts and deleting my threads, all designed, obviously, to make me unpopular and look bad. Hence, the negative results of the second poll.
I've already addressed this. If it was rigged, why hasn't ANYONE stepped up to claim misrepresentation? And if Silver's antics were what caused this unpopularity, why can't you produce one person whose opinion of you was swayed by them?
Essentially, I had posted a thread of explanation of my side of the story on the day you created your poll, which was conveniently deleted. If that isn't fishy, what is?
You mean this? (http://www.movieforums.net/showthread.php?threadid=4107). You can whine about a lot of things, but not getting your side of the story out ain't one of 'em. Everyone's heard your side...many, many times.
Can you prove anything about this alternate identity nonsense?
Vlad signed up under the same email address. Only someone with access to that email address would have been able to confirm the account -- and confirmed it was. Shortly afterwards, the email address under the account was then changed. Subsequent aliases featured the same basic IP signature and similar email addresses, as well as similar agendas. What's more, none of them were EVER online at the same time.
If you ever hope to become a long-term, quasi-respected member of this community, you're going to have to own up to this one.
Regarding unemployment statistics, where did I cast doubt over that one? I clearly stated what they were and effectively used them to make my point--a 4% increase in unemployment involving the loss of so many millions of jobs in the private sector.
This is at least the third time I've corrected this: there was no 4% increase, because despite your claims, it hasn't reached anywhere near 8% under Dubya, nor was it ever as low as 2% under Clinton. It's gone up about 2%.
I denied the veracity of statistics insofar as they invalidated my personal experience. You, on the other hand, coldly dismissed my own personal testimony as circumstantial evidence (or whatever the terminology you used). I guess I was speaking more from my heart and personal experiences, whereas you were taking the cold, clinical, mechanistic approach that federal statistics prove everything.
By that logic, if I told you "hey, in 1995 I had trouble finding a job...there's no way the unemployment rate was 3.9%! My personal experience says otherwise!," you'd be forced to accept it...which is damned silly, and you know it.
Statistics don't prove everything. But they do prove that your situation (assuming you're representing it properly) is, at the very least, not reflective of the country as a whole. This is not emotion .vs. technology. This is a narrow view of a small area .vs. federally collected nationwide data. There is no way for you to contest this point without simultaneously exhibiting an ego of heretofore unheard of sizes.
My own claims (the ones you are referring to) were not extracted from obscure sources--rather, they were statements of self-evident fact. In logic (your favorite ball game) there is such a thing as the self-evident fact.
You're not making an argument. You're saying "my argument is a self-evident fact. You'd have to be stupid to deny that self-evident fact exist." To which I say: duh. Of course they exist. You just haven't done anything to demonstrate that your statement qualifies as one of them.
Regarding my "excuses about time"--I don't see why that is so difficult to believe. Like I said, at the time, I did not have the time to conduct the extensive research required to make an in-depth case. I wasn't surfing the net and posting on an online message board to be bothered with legalistic nonsense. I was here to have some fun, and I can't be bothered with the doing in-depth research on every godforsaken little item of trivia that you feel compelled to question, in your ceaseless, monotonous cross-examination of everything I say!
Do not make controversial political statements you do not have the time to support. It's as simple as that.
What you're doing is waltzing into a modeling agency and then complaining about the poking, prodding and evaluating of your body. It's not as if you're casually discussing movies and people are nitpicking every offhand remark. You're getting involved in (and starting) intense political discussions, and complaining when someone exposes your complete disrespect for the truth.
Well, at the time, there were no indications that the unemployment situation was improving--layoffs were continuing and people were living in fear of losing their jobs at any time. Hence my remark, "unemployment is GOING through the roof," was accurate.
Now you're really squirming. Unemployment isn't even on the second floor yet. The fact that it went up doesn't mean it's "going through the roof" in the least, anymore than it dropping slightly would mean it's "falling to the floor."
My guess might have been off, but the cost of war, even if it was so "cheap", was still very substantial. How many billions did you say it was?
50. And the cost was NOT substantial. You can't call a car expensive because it costs more than any apple you've ever seen. The proper yardstick for evaluating the cost of war is the cost of other wars.
A $200,000 government program isn't much of anything in the broad scheme of things, yet by your logic it's huge, because you or I would find the sum substantial. That's a silly, perspectiveless argument. The war was cheap as hell, and your estimate was abysmal. Go back to complaining about the war on diplomatic grounds...subjectivity's your favorite blanket anyway.
Well, considering that we have been experiencing record-breaking surpluses of late, the statistics belie the fact that we have made a very substantial, if not enormous drop, from a huge surplus to an average deficit. That's what I meant by record-breaking--not so much the actual numbers and the loss.
Tell me honestly: do you really have ANY idea if the loss is record breaking, either?
Oh, come on! You have been systematically been engaging in a campaign of hostility against me that has made me unpopular and damaged my reputation on this forum, turning most of my friends against me!
What friends?
How can you deny these facts with a straight face?
Who said I was denying it? I don't deny that I dislike you strongly. I think words like "campaign" and "systematically" are paranoid nonsense, but I'll readily admit that I don't think much of you. However, you're missing the point: you don't seem able to produce a person who I've tricked into disliking you.
And please -- for your sake as much as everyone else's -- stop acting like such a martyr. There is no calculated effort to discredit you. I just read the posts on here and when someone says something I know is wrong, or suspect is wrong, I say something. If you feel targetted, it's because you say those sorts of things far more than anyone else here.
c) Racial slurs
Name one.
Relentlessly hounding me with nitpicky arguments over trivialities
Pointing out your host of glaring factual errors is not nitpicky. If you think it is, you need a reality check. If you like casual conversation, stay away from the serious stuff. You can't dive into controversial topics and just wing it. You can't make wild accusations without getting called on them.
The amount of "hounding" you're subjected to is almost directly proportionate to the frequency with which you haphazardly invent facts. Comprende?
True, I often post images, to communicate my points more effectively. But to suggest that the primary reason for my "image-posting sprees" has been to raise my quotient of posts in the non-intermission threads is absurd!
Seeing as how the timing fits, and most of us seem completely uninterested in this graphical barrages, I think it's far from absurd. Doesn't matter, though, because I can easily run a query to filter them and ascertain a more accurate number should the need ever arise.
I did quote news articles which clearly demonstrated GOP interests.
No, you did not. I read the article in question and it demonstrated one thing: that some people within the party wanted to lower the scrutiny applied to government contracts. A bit suspicious? Sure...but that doesn't clearly demonstrate anything like what you're claiming. To re-use a fitting analogy: you're telling me I was involved in a hit and run, and pointing to a pair of skidmarks in the road as proof.
Fact: you said defense contractors contributed heavily to Bush's campaign, implying that he went to war to reward them for their donations. Fact: you've yet to name a single company or cite a single contribution statistic in support of this. Ergo, you haven't backed your claim.
I have way more important things to do than spend my time listening to your endless, monotonous, droning lectures over this, that and the other, nitpicking and fault-finding over every darn thing like some chaperone from hell!
You'll notice virtually no one else has this problem with me but you...that's because the rest of us restrict our opinionated diatribes to subjects we ACTUALLY KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT. Dig?
Get out of my face and start DOING YOUR JOB like you should--i.e. start MANAGING THE FORUM for a change and stop relentlessly hounding me and complaining about every little thing I say!
Uh, the forum's running quite smoothly, Bubba.
Just a bit more. For fun.
Originally posted by Django
Opinions backed with good reasons.
You mean your accusation that Patton was "belligerent"? I must admit, that's one helluva black mark against a World War II General. Ya' know, some say he actually owned a gun. Sick bastard...
Originally posted by Django
No, my point that Patton was a controversial historical figure who went too far, possibly losing his head.
You haven't really accused him of any specific atrocious action at all. Even if I concede that he was loopy (which I don't), how, pray tell, does that put him amongst history's most despicable men?
Originally posted by Django
All I did was quote Benjamin Disraeli, who said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics." My point is that statistics can be used to prove anything and were misleading
...yet you cannot tell me just how. You cannot use statistics to prove anything. You can look at them in such a way as to potentially exaggerate or downplay the truth, but they cannot lie. The unemployment rate tells us how many people, roughly, are out of work. There's no way to use the unemployment rate to "prove" that the number is higher or lower than it is.
Originally posted by Django
I have no interest in continuing this endless debate with Yoda at all, but as long as he persists in hounding me with his irrelevant criticism
Only you would refer to my objection towards your fast and loose factual policy as "irrelevant criticism." I guess that's how your mind works, though: your speculation and opinions are more relevant than any verifiable statistic or historical record.
Originally posted by Django
It all comes down to Yoda--is he prepared to get on with his life and leave me alone?
As for the forum admin, I have a vested interest in keeping the standard of debate here high at all times. Regardless, these arguments are nowhere near life-consuming for me. My life does not stop when I decide to expose your ignorance of any given political situation. Sorry.
I'll stop questioning you when you stop saying questionable things.
Wow, that's a pretty long, in-depth dissection of my comments, Yoda! I'll have to return to them another time, as I don't have the time or inclination to study them right now. Rest assured, I'll be back to address each one of your fallacious claims, you gay wannabe, you! And please stop making false claims about your gay sex-life! Like I said, I'm not interested! LOL! :laugh:
I just want to address one remark by Jason, before I leave for today:
Originally posted by Sexy Celebrity
Oh, just call me Sherlock Homos. You should come get a job with me. You can be Harriet the Spy.
Gosh, Jason, if you're Sherlock Holmes, Chris must be the Hound of the Baskervilles, the way he has been hounding me in the past!
Originally posted by Django
Wow, that's a pretty long, in-depth dissection of my comments, Yoda!
Your post was a couple hundred words longer.
Originally posted by Django
Rest assured, I'll be back to address each one of your fallacious claims, you gay wannabe, you! And please stop making false claims about your gay sex-life! Like I said, I'm not interested! LOL! :laugh:
http://bboard.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/7/7/1523
Originally posted by Yoda
http://bboard.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/7/7/1523
Oh, please! :rolleyes: Not that again! I thought I had clarified that issue already! It has nothing to do with me! That screwy post is an obvious prank by someone who got my name, erstwhile address and telephone number from one of my prior websites! Trust you to dig up old bones! Well, on second thoughts, considering that you're "The Hound of the Baskervilles", I guess it must come naturally! :laugh: :D
Django - please, please, please just stop with this nonsense! If you want people to leave you alone, post something that disproves what they're saying, instead of starting another drama queen echo chamber. This is just awful.
Jason's Harriet the spy comment should've ended this.
Originally posted by Django
Oh, please! :rolleyes: Not that again! I thought I had clarified that issue already! It has nothing to do with me! That screwy post is an obvious prank by someone who got my name, erstwhile address and telephone number from one of my prior websites!
Of course. It's "obvious" that people have chosen to imitate you at no apparent benefit to themselves over various websites in the event that someone should go typing your name into Google. Like, duh. :rolleyes:
Originally posted by Django
Trust you to dig up old bones! Well, on second thoughts, considering that you're "The Hound of the Baskervilles", I guess it must come naturally! :laugh: :D
I didn't dig it up; Jason did. You know Jason, right? The guy whose jokes are twice as funny as yours?
Sexy Celebrity
06-20-03, 10:13 AM
Only twice? :(
I'd call the comedy help line if it wasn't always busy.
Henry The Kid
06-20-03, 12:42 PM
I didn't read all of this thread...
But are you arguing about arguments you have had in the past?
Sexy Celebrity
06-20-03, 11:42 PM
Why? You lookin' for a sex partner?
tst tst tst.............naughty boys............
:laugh:
NexijunRodent
06-21-03, 01:36 AM
Why? You lookin' for a sex partner?
no. why? you getting bored with your current and looking for someone more eccentric?
rocklarky
06-23-03, 10:32 AM
django, all you want is attention my little friend.
posting this thread we are writing on is just another excuse for you to have an argument and try and get more attention so you can be noticed on this site because your life is so boring in itself.
just get a grip and use the site for what it is meant for. movies.
Still no response? Shocking.
I'll heap some more onto the pile. You have stated, at various times:
1 - That those in charge here are racist, Nazi-like, and Stalinist.
2 - That journalistic integrity is the "very concept of the universe we live in."
3 - That your time here has "damaged your reputation." How, I can't imagine.
4 - That people go "insane" due to the unrealistically fast-paced nature of modern movies.
See a trend of hyperbole?
rocklarky
06-24-03, 05:14 PM
i bet he comes back as another alias, seen as its went so quiet with his crappy opinions.
or maybe hes dead.......
Sir Toose
06-24-03, 07:30 PM
Well, !@&$ me!
Django, up to your old tricks?
Got tired of arguing (an unwinnable one for you I think) and resorted to high drama again.
It will be my policy to ignore you from now on, unless of course, you manage to piss me off.
Originally posted by rocklarky
django, all you want is attention my little friend.
posting this thread we are writing on is just another excuse for you to have an argument and try and get more attention so you can be noticed on this site because your life is so boring in itself.
just get a grip and use the site for what it is meant for. movies.
In no way is it intended to foster attention on myself. Fact is, I was forced to start this thread, because Yoda was busy sabotaging all my other threads with his irrelevant comments. So I decided to start a thread especially for him to emotionally offload.
Originally posted by Yoda
Still no response? Shocking.
I'll heap some more onto the pile. You have stated, at various times:
1 - That those in charge here are racist, Nazi-like, and Stalinist.
2 - That journalistic integrity is the "very concept of the universe we live in."
3 - That your time here has "damaged your reputation." How, I can't imagine.
4 - That people go "insane" due to the unrealistically fast-paced nature of modern movies.
See a trend of hyperbole?
Sorry for not wasting more time on this thread. I will be sure to address your earlier comments, in good time, but regarding these comments, here goes: to quote John McEnroe, "you CANNOT be serious!" Actually, on second thought, since these criticisms are so totally out of whack, I won't waste my time discussing them at all.
Originally posted by Sir Toose
Well, !@&$ me!
Django, up to your old tricks?
Got tired of arguing (an unwinnable one for you I think) and resorted to high drama again.
It will be my policy to ignore you from now on, unless of course, you manage to piss me off.
No, I just got tired of reading Yoda's endless garbage. It's not exactly enjoyable, you know. I do it out of a sense of obligation, to try and prevent him from hounding me in all my other threads with his ceaseless crap!
FiLm Fr3aK
06-25-03, 07:58 PM
:eek:
wow, I been gone awhile...
wtf happened?!
:eek:
The Silver Bullet
06-25-03, 11:03 PM
Don't ask. Please.
For the love of Christ, don't ask.
Originally posted by Django
Sorry for not wasting more time on this thread. I will be sure to address your earlier comments, in good time, but regarding these comments, here goes: to quote John McEnroe, "you CANNOT be serious!" Actually, on second thought, since these criticisms are so totally out of whack, I won't waste my time discussing them at all.
They're straight from your mouth, brainiac, and your response doesn't cut it. Any fool with ten fingers can dismiss things offhandedly.
I believe there's two other particularly damning posts waiting to be addressed, too.
Originally posted by Yoda
They're straight from your mouth, brainiac, and your response doesn't cut it. Any fool with ten fingers can dismiss things offhandedly.
I believe there's two other particularly damning posts waiting to be addressed, too.
Look, like I said, I'll answer to your inquisition in time. I have better things to do than sit here and listen to the absurd allegations you feel compelled to level against me for no good reason!
Regarding my comments--either they have been taken completely out of context and their meaning distorted by means of adding a twisted spin on them, or else you are making too much of offhand remarks. But, just to appease you, I will answer to the charges:
1) Nazi-like insofar as you seem to be a right-winger who biases in favor of like-minded conservatives and gives a free reign to some of your friends, allowing them to engage in questionable practices such as deleting or editing my posts and threads. Also, because, on more than one occasion, you have made racially biased remarks and even claimed that someone once accused you of having connections with the KKK for your stance. I can also testify to the fact that you are so totally biased against me and hostile towards me, for no apparent reason, that I can only infer that your hostility and bias are racially and/or politically based. Stalinist insofar as you randomly delete my threads and edit my posts when you either disagree with them or perceive them as threatening in some way. Either you edit and delete them yourself, or you sanction others to do the same. That's a classic Stalinistic tactic of silencing the opposition. Also, you relentless hound me with baseless, hostile comments, in which you feel compelled to dissect my most random and light-hearted comments.
2) Your interpretation of my comment is a complete distortion of what I said. I won't waste my time adressing this one. All I can say is "re-read my comments."
3) Well, your words and actions have, indeed, damaged my reputation on this forum. By relentlessly hounding me with your baseless hostility, you have succeeded in alienating me from the affections of pretty much everyone in here. Besides, you have been fallaciously claiming to be having gay sex with me! If you don't consider that to be damaging to my reputation, I don't know what it is! Lucky for you that I am, in general, a tolerant sort of guy, or else I probably would have sued you by now!
4) Again, a total distortion of my words. Re-read what I said before wasting my time, please.
Regarding 2 and 4--I fail to see the relevance of these comments with regard to any sort of legitimate criticism you might have against me. I am entitled to my own opinions, whether or not you agree with them. You may question my opinions, but I have no obligation to explain them to you in a court of inquiry!
The reason I started this thread was for you to express your gripes concerning my behavior and "actions" on this forum. You are bringing my opinions and views into question in here as well. If you want to question my opinions and views, do so in the relevant threads! This is the place for you to question my "behavior".
Fact is, Yoda, your own words belie the fact that you lack any sort of commons sense or sense of proportion or balance. You are a completely biased, prejudiced individual with a pathetical one-dimensional frame of mind--you are so narrow, conventional and just, flat-out boring, that you make me sick! :sick: I come on this forum to engage in interesting discussions with people who I can relate to. Your sole purpose seems to be to hound me out of this forum because you feel threatened by my presence in here. Well, I don't feel particularly welcome, and, if it were not for the specific purposes I have in mind, I wouldn't be wasting my time in here, surfing through a lot of hostile nonsense from small-minded jerks like you (who believe themselves to be extremely well-informed and enlightened because they read Harry Potter novels! :rolleyes: ) Fact is, you are a jerk and a small-minded, arrogant, pompous ******* at that! It's a sad fate indeed that you happen to be the forum administrator!
r3port3r66
06-27-03, 11:12 PM
I still don't get it....
Originally posted by r3port3r66
I still don't get it....
Get what?
Originally posted by Django
Look, like I said, I'll answer to your inquisition in time. I have better things to do than sit here and listen to the absurd allegations you feel compelled to level against me for no good reason!
As I stated in an earlier (ignored) post, the amount I "bother" you is wholly proportionate to the amount of nonsense you spew.
Originally posted by Django
1) Nazi-like insofar as you seem to be a right-winger who biases in favor of like-minded conservatives and gives a free reign to some of your friends, allowing them to engage in questionable practices such as deleting or editing my posts and threads. Also, because, on more than one occasion, you have made racially biased remarks and even claimed that someone once accused you of having connections with the KKK for your stance.
I've asked you at least twice before to produce a single "racially biased remark" that I've made, and I'm still waiting. And this is the second time you've completely contorted the KKK incident, even though I've corrected you in the past.
Originally posted by Django
I can also testify to the fact that you are so totally biased against me and hostile towards me, for no apparent reason, that I can only infer that your hostility and bias are racially and/or politically based.
It's odd that "maybe he just thinks I'm a fool" was not among the reasons you considered.
Originally posted by Django
Stalinist insofar as you randomly delete my threads and edit my posts when you either disagree with them or perceive them as threatening in some way. Either you edit and delete them yourself, or you sanction others to do the same. That's a classic Stalinistic tactic of silencing the opposition.
Ah, I see. So, I am "silencing the opposition." Yet here you are, blathering away. Very curious.
Originally posted by Django
Also, you relentless hound me with baseless, hostile comments, in which you feel compelled to dissect my most random and light-hearted comments.
Light-hearted comments my eye. They've almost all been highly opinionated. Though it's been duly noted that when you can't defend your position, you do an about-face and pretend it doesn't matter anyway.
Originally posted by Django
3) Well, your words and actions have, indeed, damaged my reputation on this forum. By relentlessly hounding me with your baseless hostility, you have succeeded in alienating me from the affections of pretty much everyone in here. Besides, you have been fallaciously claiming to be having gay sex with me! If you don't consider that to be damaging to my reputation, I don't know what it is! Lucky for you that I am, in general, a tolerant sort of guy, or else I probably would have sued you by now!
You've alianated yourself from the affections of pretty much everyone here. If you disagree, produce someone whose dislike for you I am responsible for. And, in case you're keeping score, this is yet another question I've asked several times in the past.
Originally posted by Django
4) Again, a total distortion of my words. Re-read what I said before wasting my time, please.
I did. Criticizing movies for not being in real time is ridiculous, end of story.
Originally posted by Django
The reason I started this thread was for you to express your gripes concerning my behavior and "actions" on this forum. You are bringing my opinions and views into question in here as well. If you want to question my opinions and views, do so in the relevant threads! This is the place for you to question my "behavior".
Which is precisely what I've been doing. Your "opinions and views" are often false when cross-examined with logic or objective analysis, thus showing us whether you have any idea what you're talking about, which in turn tells us whether or not you're being horribly pretentious.
Originally posted by Django
Fact is, Yoda, your own words belie the fact that you lack any sort of commons sense or sense of proportion or balance. You are a completely biased, prejudiced individual with a pathetical one-dimensional frame of mind--you are so narrow, conventional and just, flat-out boring, that you make me sick! :sick: I come on this forum to engage in interesting discussions with people who I can relate to. Your sole purpose seems to be to hound me out of this forum because you feel threatened by my presence in here. Well, I don't feel particularly welcome, and, if it were not for the specific purposes I have in mind, I wouldn't be wasting my time in here, surfing through a lot of hostile nonsense from small-minded jerks like you (who believe themselves to be extremely well-informed and enlightened because they read Harry Potter novels! :rolleyes: ) Fact is, you are a jerk and a small-minded, arrogant, pompous ******* at that! It's a sad fate indeed that you happen to be the forum administrator!
Yes, YES! LET GO OF YOUR HATE! TAKE YOUR WEAPON! STRIKE ME DOWN!
Originally posted by Yoda
As I stated in an earlier (ignored) post, the amount I "bother" you is wholly proportionate to the amount of nonsense you spew.
Good grief! Not again! Nonsense I spew? Really, pretty much every single allegation you have directed against me applies ten-fold to yourself!
Originally posted by Yoda
I've asked you at least twice before to produce a single "racially biased remark" that I've made, and I'm still waiting. And this is the second time you've completely contorted the KKK incident, even though I've corrected you in the past.
Oh, please! I already have! Also, your whole attitude is biased. I don't see how I've distorted the KKK incident--you admitted yourself that someone allegedly accused you of being in league with the KKK. From where I stand, I can see why.
Originally posted by Yoda
It's odd that "maybe he just thinks I'm a fool" was not among the reasons you considered.
Actually, the main reason that comes to my mind is "maybe he is a fool!" Fact is, I have been conducting intelligent conversations with any number of others without getting into a feud as I have with you. You're the only one in here who vents his hostility against me on a regular basis, turning everyone against me. During that brief spell when you were gone from in here, it was as if a weight had been lifted from here. As if Stalin had gone on vacation and people were finally able to freely express themselves without a court of inquisition hounding their every statement. Now that you're back, it's back to the same old story! You are a relentless pain in the butt, and there's no denying that. You just do not know when to quit, and that is extremely annoying--more than annoying, just downright assholic on your part. Grow up, or, even better, get a friggin' brain transplant!
Originally posted by Yoda
Ah, I see. So, I am "silencing the opposition." Yet here you are, blathering away. Very curious.
Well, yeah, thanks to the resistance I have put up against you! That's the only reason I can think of for my still being around in this forum!
Originally posted by Yoda
Light-hearted comments my eye. They've almost all been highly opinionated. Though it's been duly noted that when you can't defend your position, you do an about-face and pretend it doesn't matter anyway.
Again, I am entitled to my opinions without having to answer to your petty court of inquisition! I am in no way obliged to explain my every comment to a jerk like you!
Originally posted by Yoda
You've alianated yourself from the affections of pretty much everyone here. If you disagree, produce someone whose dislike for you I am responsible for. And, in case you're keeping score, this is yet another question I've asked several times in the past.
All I can say is that when you were gone, I got along fine with everyone, even Sir Toose, one of your #1 supporters, who was supporting me for awhile. Now that you are back, with your relentless, unstoppable spew of hostile garbage directed against me, people are turning against me all over again. What is the obvious conclusion? Your hostility is turning people against me. Not so much a single isolated remark as your general attitude towards me and your compulsive need to question everything I say--your general attitude of inacceptance and intolerance.
Originally posted by Yoda
I did. Criticizing movies for not being in real time is ridiculous, end of story.
Again, you have deliberately misinterpreted what I have said. In any case, whatever you personally think about my opinions, I am entitled to them without having to answer to a dumb-ass court of inquisition!
Originally posted by Yoda
Which is precisely what I've been doing. Your "opinions and views" are often false when cross-examined with logic or objective analysis, thus showing us whether you have any idea what you're talking about, which in turn tells us whether or not you're being horribly pretentious.
Not true. I have proven you wrong much more often than you have proven me wrong. On the few occasions that you have done so, I have had the grace to admit my errors and concede the point to you. However, you are incapable of admitting that you are wrong, even when the evidence is completely against you! You are undoubtedly one of the most self-absorbed, arrogant, pompous jackasses I have ever encountered--with a completely closed mind, incapable of admitting the least error, even when the facts are completely against you! End of story!
Originally posted by Yoda
Yes, YES! LET GO OF YOUR HATE! TAKE YOUR WEAPON! STRIKE ME DOWN!
:laugh: Nice try playing the wounded martyr, but it doesn't quite cut it. Actually, I am expressing my frustration at your dead-headed closed-mindedness and the apparent fact that nothing I say seems to penetrate into your dense, thick skull and register in that dull, flickering brain.
Oh, please! I already have!
I haven't seen these alleged racial slurs despite asking several times. Show me.
I don't see how I've distorted the KKK incident--you admitted yourself that someone allegedly accused you of being in league with the KKK. From where I stand, I can see why.
That's not what I admitted. What I "admitted" is that someone once said "maybe you'd be comfortable visiting the KKK website." You immediately warped this into me "having connections" and "being in league" with them. What was all that you were saying about bias, again?
You're the only one in here who vents his hostility against me on a regular basis, turning everyone against me.
The key phrase being "on a regular basis." You've raised a number of people's ire...but those smarter than myself gave up on arguing with you some time ago.
Well, yeah, thanks to the resistance I have put up against you! That's the only reason I can think of for my still being around in this forum!
Wrong. Everyone who wants to disagree with me has been able to...yourself include. Therefore your claim is false.
Again, I am entitled to my opinions without having to answer to your petty court of inquisition! I am in no way obliged to explain my every comment to a jerk like you!
You ignored my point, which stands: the claims I question are rarely, if ever, light-hearted. The bulk of my contentions have been in response to highly opinionated, political claims.
All I can say is that when you were gone, I got along fine with everyone, even Sir Toose, one of your #1 supporters, who was supporting me for awhile.
Firstly, he was not "supporting" you. He was tolerating you and encouraging you to be reasonable more often.
Secondly, the fact that things were more peaceful for you is completely consistent with all I've been saying. You are flippant and careless when it comes to your stances/arguments, and you hate being called on it. I'm the kind of person who calls people out, so it stands to reason that you'd be more bothered when I'm around.
Not true. I have proven you wrong much more often than you have proven me wrong.
Name one such instance.
Nice try playing the wounded martyr, but it doesn't quite cut it.
I don't see how mocking your over-the-top, repetitive speeches of hatred constitutes "playing the wounded matryr." Methinks this is what psychologists call "projection."
Originally posted by Yoda
I haven't seen these alleged racial slurs despite asking several times. Show me.
I've already provided a link elsewhere. Look it up yourself.
Originally posted by Yoda
That's not what I admitted. What I "admitted" is that someone once said "maybe you'd be comfortable visiting the KKK website." You immediately warped this into me "having connections" and "being in league" with them. What was all that you were saying about bias, again?
If I remember correctly, you "admitted" that someone once alleged that you might be in league with the KKK. I don't recall anything about a KKK website.
Originally posted by Yoda
The key phrase being "on a regular basis." You've raised a number of people's ire...but those smarter than myself gave up on arguing with you some time ago.
Interestingly, these people only seem to vent their hostility for me when encouraged by you. Upon your departure from the forum, there doesn't seem to be anyone who has any sort of gripe with me, so much so that even some of your most ardent supporters (like Sir Toose) express words of encouragement and friendship towards me.
Originally posted by Yoda
Wrong. Everyone who wants to disagree with me has been able to...yourself include. Therefore your claim is false.
Oh, sure . . . so long as their posts aren't edited or their threads deleted or their login ids and IP addresses banned! :rolleyes:
Originally posted by Yoda
You ignored my point, which stands: the claims I question are rarely, if ever, light-hearted. The bulk of my contentions have been in response to highly opinionated, political claims.
Well, my "highly opinionated political claims" are my opinions, and I am entitled to them, unless proven wrong beyond a doubt. But the truth is that around 30% of your gripes have been regarding the issues. The other 70% are completely baseless allegations concerning every little offhand remark I might make or my tone of voice or the views I might express. There is bad blood here--even racism, I might allege. You feel compelled to dissect everything I say--the slightest casual remark I might make. This is going way too far. It reflects a racial/political bias on your part. Not so much an issue of actual words from you as a reflection of your general attitude, one of nitpicky trivializing and baseless hostile antagonism which seems to suggest, to me, a deep-seated hatred on your part. The bulk of your contentions, therefore, have been completely irrelevant.
Originally posted by Yoda
Firstly, he was not "supporting" you. He was tolerating you and encouraging you to be reasonable more often.
Looked like support, to me, whatever spin you might want to put on it! Anyway, to think that I have to prove that I merit tolerance reflects on your own intolerant attitude--you are biased, intolerant, racist, hostile and just plain assholic!
Originally posted by Yoda
Secondly, the fact that things were more peaceful for you is completely consistent with all I've been saying. You are flippant and careless when it comes to your stances/arguments, and you hate being called on it. I'm the kind of person who calls people out, so it stands to reason that you'd be more bothered when I'm around.
Wrong! You are the only jerk in here with a grudge against me and who seeks to dig up any pretext to vent your hostility against me, justifying it with superficial BS.
Originally posted by Yoda
Name one such instance.
Oh, please! :rolleyes: The term "Keynesian Economic Theory" comes to mind, but, of course, you will deny it! More evidence about how thick-headed you are! Truth is, you have never once admitted how wrong you are, which only goes to prove that you are incapable of doing so. What is more, you actually have the audacity of accusing me of the very character flaws that you have been displaying in such abundance--arrogance, elitist pretensions, thick-headedness, ignorance, narrow-mindedness, etc., etc.
Originally posted by Yoda
I don't see how mocking your over-the-top, repetitive speeches of hatred constitutes "playing the wounded matryr." Methinks this is what psychologists call "projection."
What the devil!!! :laugh: Is there no limit to how far you will go to distort my words? Or engage in meaningless psychobabble to give your words the facade of legitimacy? Projection indeed!
I've already provided a link elsewhere. Look it up yourself.
No, I don't believe you ever have provided a link. Show it to me.
If I remember correctly, you "admitted" that someone once alleged that you might be in league with the KKK. I don't recall anything about a KKK website.
I can't help what you do or do not recall. No one ever alleged that I might be in league with the KKK. This is no more than another one of your sloppy accusations.
Interestingly, these people only seem to vent their hostility for me when encouraged by you. Upon your departure from the forum, there doesn't seem to be anyone who has any sort of gripe with me, so much so that even some of your most ardent supporters (like Sir Toose) express words of encouragement and friendship towards me.
I don't encourage anyone to vent at you. If anything, when asked about these matters I generally tell them that ignoring you is probably the best method of action if and when they disagree. As a number of us have tried to tell you, all enmity you've encountered is of your own doing.
Oh, sure . . . so long as their posts aren't edited or their threads deleted or their login ids and IP addresses banned! :rolleyes:
You're referring to your numerous aliases named things similar to "I'MBACKAGAIN"? Yes, how horribly shameful of me to ban new members who clearly had so much to contribute to this community.
Well, my "highly opinionated political claims" are my opinions, and I am entitled to them, unless proven wrong beyond a doubt. But the truth is that around 30% of your gripes have been regarding the issues. The other 70% are completely baseless allegations concerning every little offhand remark I might make or my tone of voice or the views I might express.
You're making numbers up. Almost all of my contentions with you are in response to very forceful, dogmatic claims. Per usual, if you disagree, provide an example. Seeing as how you claim I question you constantly, and allegedly 70% of those instances are in response to some light-hearted remark, it shouldn't take you long at all to find a few.
Wrong! You are the only jerk in here with a grudge against me and who seeks to dig up any pretext to vent your hostility against me, justifying it with superficial BS.
The above is pure rhetoric. I stand by what I said: you bring enmity upon yourself via your inability to copy with someone who legitimately questions your plethora of dubious claims. You started irking people VERY early on here, long before I gave you so much as a passing thought. You need to accept that the reputation you have is the reputation you've earned.
Oh, please! :rolleyes: The term "Keynesian Economic Theory" comes to mind, but, of course, you will deny it! More evidence about how thick-headed you are!
I demonstrated several times without retort (from you or anyone else) that the Keynesian theory is completely irrational as a long-term economic policy.
Truth is, you have never once admitted how wrong you are, which only goes to prove that you are incapable of doing so. What is more, you actually have the audacity of accusing me of the very character flaws that you have been displaying in such abundance--arrogance, elitist pretensions, thick-headedness, ignorance, narrow-mindedness, etc., etc.
If I recall correctly, I'm not the only one who had the "audacity" to accuse you of those things.
Originally posted by Yoda
The key phrase being "on a regular basis." You've raised a number of people's ire...but those smarter than myself gave up on arguing with you some time ago.
Damn...Why'd you have to go and say that?
:laugh: :(
That's the same reason I keep trying to avoid argument with Yoda, but he keeps hounding me like a dog from hell with his persistent and relentlessly baseless arguments!
Originally posted by Yoda
No, I don't believe you ever have provided a link. Show it to me.
Okay, if you insist, here it is again: http://www.movieforums.net/showthread.php?s=&postid=87779&highlight=Indian+Immigrant+vote#post87779
Originally posted by Yoda
I can't help what you do or do not recall. No one ever alleged that I might be in league with the KKK. This is no more than another one of your sloppy accusations.
Allow me to refresh your memory, O forgetful one:
A member once (basically) accused me of being like a member of the KKK. I kid you not.
This is the link: http://www.movieforums.net/showthread.php?s=&postid=79972&highlight=KKK#post79972
Originally posted by Yoda
I don't encourage anyone to vent at you. If anything, when asked about these matters I generally tell them that ignoring you is probably the best method of action if and when they disagree. As a number of us have tried to tell you, all enmity you've encountered is of your own doing.
I hardly think so. Your attitude has, all along, been one of antagonism towards me and bias against me. Your relentless hounding of me, the baseless allegations you have continually levelled against me, the ceaseless dissection of my every offhand comment--all have contributed to make me unpopular. Again, while you were gone from here, I was getting along just fine with everyone. Your return has again served to turn people against me.
What's more, other board members have also commented on your biased attitudes. Sunfrog has been your most regular critic, but Piddzilla has also made some pretty insightful remarks:
So, it's pretty obvious whose side you're taking on this issue. theshape's post is aggressive and hostile and you're supporting it while you in your role as administrator of this site are actively taking a stand against Monkeypunch's anti-fascist post.
"But now Yoda is silent."
About what? I've asked this once before, I believe.
About the posts on this thread set out to do nothing else than harrass a single individual - what else???
You, however, decided that theshape82 needed your help and support even before he had had the time to respond to Monkeypunch himself. This is, of course, not a fault from your part - you are free to post on any thread at any time more than anybody else on here. But this just demonstrates where your position as a moderator or administrator is and that I don't only think you are passive as such but also supportive of posts expressing very muddy views.
Here's the link: http://www.movieforums.net/showthread.php?s=&postid=80067#post80067
Originally posted by Yoda
You're referring to your numerous aliases named things similar to "I'MBACKAGAIN"? Yes, how horribly shameful of me to ban new members who clearly had so much to contribute to this community.
What the hell are you talking about???
Originally posted by Yoda
You're making numbers up. Almost all of my contentions with you are in response to very forceful, dogmatic claims. Per usual, if you disagree, provide an example. Seeing as how you claim I question you constantly, and allegedly 70% of those instances are in response to some light-hearted remark, it shouldn't take you long at all to find a few.
I would hardly call these numbers made up. I admit they are not based on any scientific study, but they are a rough estimate of the breakdown, and a very valid estimate, I might add.
Originally posted by Yoda
The above is pure rhetoric. I stand by what I said: you bring enmity upon yourself via your inability to copy with someone who legitimately questions your plethora of dubious claims. You started irking people VERY early on here, long before I gave you so much as a passing thought. You need to accept that the reputation you have is the reputation you've earned.
The reputation I have "earned" has been purely the result of your baseless allegations against me, and is purely fictitious. When you have raised valid issues, as opposed to spamming my threads with irrelevant comments, I have provided the necessary substantiation. To deny this makes a BLATANT LIAR of you, I'm sorry to say.
Originally posted by Yoda
I demonstrated several times without retort (from you or anyone else) that the Keynesian theory is completely irrational as a long-term economic policy.
And yet, FDR, the most popular president in US history, based his economic policy on Keynesian theory. Sorry, but your credibility simply doesn't measure up to that of FDR.
Originally posted by Yoda
If I recall correctly, I'm not the only one who had the "audacity" to accuse you of those things.
I think you recall incorrectly.
Okay, if you insist, here it is again: http://www.movieforums.net/showthre...+vote#post87779
Congratulations, you've just proven that I called you an Indian. Now, where are those racist comments you love to blather about?
This is the link: http://www.movieforums.net/showthre...t=KKK#post79972
"Being like" and "having connections with" are entirely different things The former is a judgement of character...the latter is a judgement of events. Regardless, I can give you the actual quote, if you like, as well as the retraction and apology that followed shortly afterwards.
Again, while you were gone from here, I was getting along just fine with everyone. Your return has again served to turn people against me.
Everyone got along fine when you were gone, too. All you're establishing here is that when I'm around you, it causes you to look bad, which I don't deny. Of course people turn against you when someone takes the time to call you on your sloppy, careless, uinformed (yet still opinionated) claims.
What's more, other board members have also commented on your biased attitudes. Sunfrog has been your most regular critic, but Piddzilla has also made some pretty insightful remarks:
Here's the link: http://www.movieforums.net/showthre...+week#post80067
You're grasping. Sunfrog's gripes are political, and he'll concur with anyone whose political beliefs line up with his, regardless of the validity of what they say. As for Pid: if you think he believes I'm using my power here to unfairly silence arguments and influence discussions, ask him. This is quite aside from the fact that even if you could produce a person or two who agrees with you, it wouldn't make you right. If you want to make this a popularity contest, you'll lose.
What the hell are you talking about???
From an earlier (ignored) post:
"Vlad signed up under the same email address. Only someone with access to that email address would have been able to confirm the account -- and confirmed it was. Shortly afterwards, the email address under the account was then changed. Subsequent aliases featured the same basic IP signature and similar email addresses, as well as similar agendas. What's more, none of them were EVER online at the same time."
I would hardly call these numbers made up. I admit they are not based on any scientific study, but they are a rough estimate of the breakdown, and a very valid estimate, I might add.
"Per usual, if you disagree, provide an example. Seeing as how you claim I question you constantly, and allegedly 70% of those instances are in response to some light-hearted remark, it shouldn't take you long at all to find a few."
And yet, FDR, the most popular president in US history, based his economic policy on Keynesian theory. Sorry, but your credibility simply doesn't measure up to that of FDR.
He is nowhere near the most popular President in US history. It's called the twenty-second amendment, genius. What's more, Washington stepped down, and Lincoln was assassinated.
More importantly, many of the policies FDR actually enacted were consistent with supply-side economics. And, of course, I've already demonstrated how flawed the logic behind Keynesianism is, to which your only defense is to point to some historical figure in hopes that it'll support your case.
I think you recall incorrectly.
If you don't think many people here think you possess "arrogance, elitist pretensions, thick-headedness, ignorance, narrow-mindedness, etc., etc.," then you can't be helped.
Originally posted by Yoda
Congratulations, you've just proven that I called you an Indian. Now, where are those racist comments you love to blather about?
Oh, please! :rolleyes: How would you react if I (hypothetically) called you an ignorant redneck, or something along those lines? You didn't just call me an Indian, you called me, in effect, an "insane Indian immigrant." I suppose that is a entirely tolerant, unbiased remark to make, eh?
Originally posted by Yoda
"Being like" and "having connections with" are entirely different things The former is a judgement of character...the latter is a judgement of events. Regardless, I can give you the actual quote, if you like, as well as the retraction and apology that followed shortly afterwards.
I stand corrected . . . my mistake. So, you don't explicitly have connections with the KKK (at least none you have admitted), you are only LIKE a member of the KKK . . . and I can see where that is coming from!
Originally posted by Yoda
Everyone got along fine when you were gone, too. All you're establishing here is that when I'm around you, it causes you to look bad, which I don't deny. Of course people turn against you when someone takes the time to call you on your sloppy, careless, uinformed (yet still opinionated) claims.
I don't think it has anything to do with my "sloppy, careless, uninformed (yet still opinionated) claims" at all. Rather, I think it has to do with your relentless, baseless hostility towards me, coupled with your propensity to distort everything I say and dissect my most offhand remark in the most petty manner imaginable, coupled with your endorsement of Silver Bullet's antics, which involve editing and deleting my posts.
Originally posted by Yoda
You're grasping. Sunfrog's gripes are political, and he'll concur with anyone whose political beliefs line up with his, regardless of the validity of what they say. As for Pid: if you think he believes I'm using my power here to unfairly silence arguments and influence discussions, ask him. This is quite aside from the fact that even if you could produce a person or two who agrees with you, it wouldn't make you right. If you want to make this a popularity contest, you'll lose.
If Sunfrog's gripes are political, then yours are doubly so! As for Pid, I have already quoted him. What more need I say. He clearly states that you have, in the past, displayed a distinct bias in your administrative role.
Originally posted by Yoda
From an earlier (ignored) post:
"Vlad signed up under the same email address. Only someone with access to that email address would have been able to confirm the account -- and confirmed it was. Shortly afterwards, the email address under the account was then changed. Subsequent aliases featured the same basic IP signature and similar email addresses, as well as similar agendas. What's more, none of them were EVER online at the same time."
Proves nothing, Sherlock. You have no evidence of anything.
Originally posted by Yoda
"Per usual, if you disagree, provide an example. Seeing as how you claim I question you constantly, and allegedly 70% of those instances are in response to some light-hearted remark, it shouldn't take you long at all to find a few."
Well, if you want examples, then I can easily give you two:
2 - That journalistic integrity is the "very concept of the universe we live in."
. . .
4 - That people go "insane" due to the unrealistically fast-paced nature of modern movies.
These are the most absurd, irrelevant gripes anyone could ever make against anyone else!
Originally posted by Yoda
He is nowhere near the most popular President in US history. It's called the twenty-second amendment, genius. What's more, Washington stepped down, and Lincoln was assassinated.
Excuses, excuses! Fact is, he was elected the most times in the history of the US presidency. Need I say more? Furthermore, he successfully steered the US through two of its biggest crises in it history, namely the Great Depression and WWII. Thus, not only was he, arguably, the most popular President, but also the most capable.
Originally posted by Yoda
More importantly, many of the policies FDR actually enacted were consistent with supply-side economics. And, of course, I've already demonstrated how flawed the logic behind Keynesianism is, to which your only defense is to point to some historical figure in hopes that it'll support your case.
That's a weak argument if I ever heard one. FDR's "New Deal" which he used to combat the Great Depression was applied Keynesianism at its finest. Period.
Originally posted by Yoda
If you don't think many people here think you possess "arrogance, elitist pretensions, thick-headedness, ignorance, narrow-mindedness, etc., etc.," then you can't be helped.
If anyone here has a negative impression of me, it is entirely due to your persuasion, incitement and antagonism towards me.
How would you react if I (hypothetically) called you an ignorant redneck, or something along those lines? You didn't just call me an Indian, you called me, in effect, an "insane Indian immigrant." I suppose that is a entirely tolerant, unbiased remark to make, eh?
Redneck is a mild racial slur. Indian is not. If you called me an ignorant redneck, I'd think you were a fool, but I wouldn't be so daft as to try to pretend all of your gripes with me were racially motivated. That's a silly, desperate argument.
I stand corrected . . . my mistake. So, you don't explicitly have connections with the KKK (at least none you have admitted), you are only LIKE a member of the KKK . . . and I can see where that is coming from!
Tell me about it. I called you an Indian...I might as well start burning crosses. :rolleyes:
I don't think it has anything to do with my "sloppy, careless, uninformed (yet still opinionated) claims" at all. Rather, I think it has to do with your relentless, baseless hostility towards me, coupled with your propensity to distort everything I say and dissect my most offhand remark in the most petty manner imaginable, coupled with your endorsement of Silver Bullet's antics, which involve editing and deleting my posts.
Then how do you explain the fact that people like Steve and Cait think the same as I do in regards to the way you argue, without any prompt or influence from me? They've been wholly independent throughout all this, and yet have come to the same conclusions.
If Sunfrog's gripes are political, then yours are doubly so! As for Pid, I have already quoted him. What more need I say. He clearly states that you have, in the past, displayed a distinct bias in your administrative role.
For the billionth time: if my gripes were political, why haven't they gotten anything even resembling similar "treatment"? I'll tell you why: they know that it's childish and pretentious to babble away on subjects you don't know about.
Yes, you quoted Pid. You quoted a question from Pid. Not a conclusion. Do you ever want to know whether what you're saying is actually true?
Proves nothing, Sherlock. You have no evidence of anything.
Yes, I do. Unless someone broke into your email account, at least two of those aliases are yours. What's more, they all came flooding in around the same time, to defend you, and featured IP addresses so similar that they must've all lived in the same basic area around you, too.
You've been nailed to the wall. Quit squirming.
2 - That journalistic integrity is the "very concept of the universe we live in."
. . .
4 - That people go "insane" due to the unrealistically fast-paced nature of modern movies.
These are the most absurd, irrelevant gripes anyone could ever make against anyone else!
Even if I were to assume they are absurd and irrelevant (which they're not), they're not in response to casual, offhand remarks. They are in response to very deliberate remarks in a long post within an in-depth discussion.
Excuses, excuses! Fact is, he was elected the most times in the history of the US presidency. Need I say more? Furthermore, he successfully steered the US through two of its biggest crises in it history, namely the Great Depression and WWII. Thus, not only was he, arguably, the most popular President, but also the most capable.
Yes, excuses. And good ones. Namely that in modern times it hasn't even been POSSIBLE to elect a President more than twice, and two Presidents both more famous than FDR (Washington and Lincoln) both were unwilling or unable to continue with what would've certainly been at LEAST third terms.
Sorry, but you're dead wrong.
That's a weak argument if I ever heard one. FDR's "New Deal" which he used to combat the Great Depression was applied Keynesianism at its finest. Period.
No, it wasn't, and what I said stands: he did not hold true to Keynesian policies through his term. Frankly, why would he? The only supply and demand on his mind for quite awhile was the supply and demand for bullets.
I've already destroyed the logic behind it without so much as half a retort from you. Now you've just fallen back on what you think is a reliable crutch for your ignorance: leaning on the popularity of some historical figure who you think held the same ideals. Sorry, but you don't prove Keynesianism by pointing to FDR anymore than you prove Christianity by pointing to Augustine.
If anyone here has a negative impression of me, it is entirely due to your persuasion, incitement and antagonism towards me.
In that case, you claims about lacking charisma and intelligence can't be true. Morons aren't cleverly persuasive.
Regardless, this is nothing more than a child shirking responsibility for its actions. Grow the hell up and face reality. There's not a person here who's not disturbed by the alleged fact that you're older than I am. Bet on it.
Caitlyn
06-29-03, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by Django
If anyone here has a negative impression of me, it is entirely due to your persuasion, incitement and antagonism towards me.
Contrary to your popular belief, my opinion of you lies solely on top of your head…
Before I go any further with this discussion, out of curiosity, how old are you, Yoda, and you, Caitlyn? At least, that way I'll have an idea of your emotional maturity. Fact is, I have always been assuming that I have been talking with peers, the thought never occurring to me that I might be discussing issues with minors. If you can give me an idea of your respective ages, that way I'll know how to address you in the future.
Caitlyn
06-29-03, 09:24 PM
In other words it never dawned on you that some of the posters on a very public forum might in fact be minors… why am I not surprised…
Piddzilla
06-30-03, 08:25 AM
Before I go any further with this discussion, out of curiosity, how old are you, Yoda, and you, Caitlyn? At least, that way I'll have an idea of your emotional maturity. Fact is, I have always been assuming that I have been talking with peers, the thought never occurring to me that I might be discussing issues with minors. If you can give me an idea of your respective ages, that way I'll know how to address you in the future.
You know what?? When I found out that you were 34 I reacted the same way as I did when I found out that Yoda was 18 - I almost fell off my chair. Bottomline is, you are a very immature man for your age and Yoda is a very mature man for his age. Note that I called both of you "man". Drop this age-thing right now... You're only biting your own ass when you disqualify past discussions because of your opponents' age.
um, as an outside observer to some of the raging history between our two protagonists, i'd have to say django, fine orator that you are, and sweetly principled too it seems, if there's some immature maturity competition going on, you lost it to Yoda a long time ago, way before you brought up the non-issue of age. I'm sure you're a lovely bloke (and no i haven't been turned against you by some sibilant chain of internet in-chat, but just coz you don't conceede defeat when perhaps you should, and coz methinks you "protest to much" from time to time).
back to the movies eh? (and the Iraq thread of course, and my imminant: "is GM bad for us" thread etc etc. Long live the polemic ;))
First of all, I can safely attest to you that I am a lot more mature than Yoda. The reality is that Yoda only sounds mature because he is the acting forum admin, and usually talks in his typical officious manner. I would argue that, although I admit he is doing a decent job on the technical side of things in the forum, he seriously lacks the maturity to be an admin. Most of my antagonism towards Yoda in the past has stemmed from my anger at his poor judgment in administrative issues--e.g. his inability to distinguish between a trivial detail and an important issue, his propensity to spam threads with pointless irrelevancies, his biased support of his close buddies and his endorsement of their questionable practices, etc. I assumed that Yoda was an adult of around 40 or so, hence my antagonism towards him. Now that I see that he is only 18, his actions are understandable, if not entirely excusable. Yoda may be very technically proficient, but he seriously lacks the maturity to effectively administrate on the content. If I were in his position, I would abdicate my authority (in terms of managing the content) to someone with more emotional maturity and stick to technical issues, where I would know what I was talking about. I, on the other hand, because I have taken an anti-authoritarian stance in most of the discussions in here, consequently have come across as seeming to be a lot less mature than I am. Also, if you notice, in the past, I have frequently expressed my frustration at Yoda's actions by telling him to "grow up." Again, this was done so under the impression that Yoda was around 40 years old, which is how old he sounds (by virtue of his extremely dull, monotonous, uninteresting manner of speech). But, considering that he is only 18, I can't fault him for lacking in maturity vis-a-vis his judgment, though I can fault him for his shabby judgment on a number of issues and question his competency as a forum admin (not technically, but with regard to the forum content), especially noting his habitual display of bias and double-standards on numerous occasions. Particularly noteworthy in this regard is his sanction and endorsement of Silver Bullet's juvenile tactics of editing my posts and filling them with profane and insulting garbage directed against me.
Redneck is a mild racial slur. Indian is not. If you called me an ignorant redneck, I'd think you were a fool, but I wouldn't be so daft as to try to pretend all of your gripes with me were racially motivated. That's a silly, desperate argument.
If I recall correctly, the term you used was "insane Indian immigrant." I think that's at least equivalent to "ignorant redneck." Interestingly, when you referred to me as an "insane Indian immigrant," I immediately thought to myself, "Wow! What an ignoramus!" Also, the reason I think your gripes against me are racially motivated comes from an observation of your attitude over a period of time. A lot of things you have said in here, your bias displayed on numerous occasions, all convince me that you might be racist in your thinking. You asked me for examples, and I gave them to you.
Tell me about it. I called you an Indian...I might as well start burning crosses. :rolleyes:
That's very quaint, but I hardly think this is an issue to make light of. The fact that you do make light of an issue as serious as this is further evidence of either your immaturity or your racial bias or, possibly, both.
Then how do you explain the fact that people like Steve and Cait think the same as I do in regards to the way you argue, without any prompt or influence from me? They've been wholly independent throughout all this, and yet have come to the same conclusions.
I hardly think that their conclusions are "without any prompt or influence from you" considering that you have actively supported them on numerous occasions! Fact is, it seems your pet project consists in turning people against me any way you can. I come in here to chat with people--this is recreation, not business, for me. I discuss political issues in informal conversation, kind of like one would discuss politics in a bar or in an office rec room. It's not my intention to come in here to pursue dissertation studies in political science! You don't seem to have anything else to do other than spend your time researching every trivial issue in the planet! Like I said, this is a forum, and I come in here to chat informally, not to get into a major debate over nitpicky, pointless trivialities! The fact that you have to ruin every single attempt on my part to start a discussion in this vein reflects on the fact that you are probably a college nerd with no social life and nothing better to do than gripe over nonsense with anyone you happen to dislike, more often than not, as a consequence of your own prejudices.
For the billionth time: if my gripes were political, why haven't they gotten anything even resembling similar "treatment"? I'll tell you why: they know that it's childish and pretentious to babble away on subjects you don't know about.
Yes, you quoted Pid. You quoted a question from Pid. Not a conclusion. Do you ever want to know whether what you're saying is actually true?
Oh, they have gotten exactly the same treatment. You have pretty consistently displayed the propensity to alienate pretty much anyone you happen to disagree with politically. Also, as a forum admin, nothing justifies the juvenile tactics you have endorsed against me, namely, editing my posts and filling them with offensive garbage. I honestly don't see how you can claim to have the level of maturity to effectively manage the content of a forum like this in the light of such behavior on your part, which, frankly, belongs to a 3rd grade schoolroom! So much for your maturity! I quoted Pidzilla to demonstrate that he has, in the past, expressed concerns very similar to mine--i.e. concerning your biased mismanagement of the forum--your alienation of people with views that you do not sympathize with and your endorsement of anyone, even the most juvenile of people (case in point, Silver Bullet), who happens to be on your side on the issues. Again: BIASED, RACIST and JUVENILE!!!
Yes, I do. Unless someone broke into your email account, at least two of those aliases are yours. What's more, they all came flooding in around the same time, to defend you, and featured IP addresses so similar that they must've all lived in the same basic area around you, too.
You've been nailed to the wall. Quit squirming.
All you have voiced are your suspicions. There is no hard evidence to back up any of your claims. You are just grasping at straws, in a typically dunderheaded manner.
Even if I were to assume they are absurd and irrelevant (which they're not), they're not in response to casual, offhand remarks. They are in response to very deliberate remarks in a long post within an in-depth discussion.
Well, not only are they MAJOR distortions of what I said in the past, they are also completely IRRELEVANT to the issue of my conduct on this forum, which is the reason for your mindless inquisition. Face it, you are a liar and a racist who is intent on contriving ANY reason or excuse to pursue an endless campaign of hostility against me. YOU have been nailed to the wall! Quit squirming--none of your excuses bears any weight or substance.
Yes, excuses. And good ones. Namely that in modern times it hasn't even been POSSIBLE to elect a President more than twice, and two Presidents both more famous than FDR (Washington and Lincoln) both were unwilling or unable to continue with what would've certainly been at LEAST third terms.
Sorry, but you're dead wrong.
Well, whatever the circumstances might be, facts are facts. All you can offer are hypotheses of what might have been. To which, all I can say is that speculations prove nothing.
No, it wasn't, and what I said stands: he did not hold true to Keynesian policies through his term. Frankly, why would he? The only supply and demand on his mind for quite awhile was the supply and demand for bullets.
I've already destroyed the logic behind it without so much as half a retort from you. Now you've just fallen back on what you think is a reliable crutch for your ignorance: leaning on the popularity of some historical figure who you think held the same ideals. Sorry, but you don't prove Keynesianism by pointing to FDR anymore than you prove Christianity by pointing to Augustine..
Ridiculous. FDR's New Deal, involving the creation of new jobs in the public sector to stimulate consumer demand and, thereby, the economy, by injecting cash into the economy is the very essence of Keynesian demand-side economics. Sure, I can point to FDR as an example of applied Keynesianism and question your own flawed marginalization of the same. Sorry, but your claims are, as usual, completely baseless and unjustified. Seems to me that you have developed a habit of making hollow declarations without being substantiated by the facts! You may claim to have won the debate all you like and claim that I am ignorant or misinformed, or that I fail to provide a basis for my arguments, but ALL THESE CLAIMS are, quite simply, WRONG!!! They are baseless, fallacious claims that only UNDERMINE YOUR CREDIBILITY!!!
In that case, you claims about lacking charisma and intelligence can't be true. Morons aren't cleverly persuasive.
Regardless, this is nothing more than a child shirking responsibility for its actions. Grow the hell up and face reality. There's not a person here who's not disturbed by the alleged fact that you're older than I am. Bet on it.
Well, I hardly said you were cleverly persuasive. You are, most certainly, devoid of charisma and intelligence--a singularly dull, monotonous drudge of an individual, if I might add. At your age, I would be out there having a good time instead of carrying on endlessly over pointless nonsense like a drone from hell! You probably have no social life, either, and I can see why! People must run the heck away from you! The fact is, being forum admin (and a singularly biased, immature admin at that) hardly makes you responsible or mature. If anyone has displayed a lack of maturity or responsibility for their actions in here, it is yourself. Your age excuses that, but, in that case, you shouldn't be administrating on the content of this forum either. In your position, I would stick to the technical issues, where I would be competent, and give someone a lot more mature the reigns of handling the content. And concerning our age differences, I happen to be a light-hearted, fun-loving guy who happens to know how to have a good time. On the other hand, you are a singularly dull, monotonous, officious, boring drudge who probably has cobwebs growing out of his ears, at the same time, being too immature to handle the responsibility he has taken on. If anyone is disturbed about our age differences, that is probably the reason, I might venture to suggest.
Piddzilla
07-01-03, 06:05 AM
Django, I think you are a computer. Or at least a cyborg.
Well, I used to be human . . .
But then, Yoda came along, and I gradually began to metamorphose into something less than human . . . and here, I stand before you today, more a machine than a man, I'm sad to say! :bawling:
Tomorrow's installment:
Yoda coughs up a red pill and collapses at his computer. Can the doctor's save him?
Django's passionate love for Attention leads to a messy argument. Will his article for Melodrama magazine go unwritten?
And Kong lapses into a coma (change of subject - just want to argue with Kong about a spoon. SPOON FEED ME KONG!!)
...alternative appraisal...
:rolleyes:
r3port3r66
07-01-03, 01:27 PM
Django(Oh boy you do like attention!), what is this facination you have with Yoda? It's almost like you have this fixation on arguing with him. You set him up by throwing wild and untrue accusations at him, he defends himself, you point out that he's wrong by throwing more accusations at him, he defends himself again, you throw more accusations at him, he defends himself, accusations, defense, accusations, defense, accusations, defense, accusations, defense...
Are you really bored? It really feels like you are cyber-stalking Yoda: reading--I mean really reading his post--then twisting his words around so much that he needs to go back, find his posts, re-read them, figure out what exactly you're accusing him of, defend himself again, read more accusations, defend himself, accusations, defend...
My goodness, with all the time you spend harrassing, yes harrassing him, I would think you must have nothing but time or money on your hands and only a few friends!
Sometimes this tennis match is amusing, but my neck is seriously beginning to hurt!
Anyway, you two can use your time whichever way you choose, but to me, it seems Django, you're wasting Yoda's time on purpose, and that seems a bit psychotic. Are you wasting his time on purpose?
Sexy Celebrity
07-01-03, 01:43 PM
WTF happened to when Django only posted poetry?! Do you remember that little guy? I liked him! It was cute that he posted all his poetry. Nobody knew him, and now....
Sir Toose
07-01-03, 07:31 PM
Most of my antagonism towards Yoda in the past has stemmed from my anger at his poor judgment in administrative issues--e.g. his inability to distinguish between a trivial detail and an important issue...
I suppose your introductory post here where you detailed all of the facts of your previous forum (in stunningly boring detail) are representative of 'important issues'?
Django(Oh boy you do like attention!), what is this facination you have with Yoda? It's almost like you have this fixation on arguing with him. You set him up by throwing wild and untrue accusations at him, he defends himself, you point out that he's wrong by throwing more accusations at him, he defends himself again, you throw more accusations at him, he defends himself, accusations, defense, accusations, defense, accusations, defense, accusations, defense...
Are you really bored? It really feels like you are cyber-stalking Yoda: reading--I mean really reading his post--then twisting his words around so much that he needs to go back, find his posts, re-read them, figure out what exactly you're accusing him of, defend himself again, read more accusations, defend himself, accusations, defend...
My goodness, with all the time you spend harrassing, yes harrassing him, I would think you must have nothing but time or money on your hands and only a few friends!
Sometimes this tennis match is amusing, but my neck is seriously beginning to hurt!
Anyway, you two can use your time whichever way you choose, but to me, it seems Django, you're wasting Yoda's time on purpose, and that seems a bit psychotic. Are you wasting his time on purpose?
I think you're a bit mixed up here, fella. I mean, how in God's good name can you possibly accuse me of "cyber-stalking" Yoda???!!! Your claims are totally out of whack, dude--you need to do a bit of switching around. I have been on the defensive all along, the target of harassment from Yoda and his pals! I honestly don't see how you can honestly claim what you have been claiming out here! Fact is, now that I see what a hostile and biased arena this forum is, I want, more than anything, to be out of here, but I do have some issues to clear up before I leave, and I have raised them with Yoda elsewhere.
I'll keep this short.
If I recall correctly, the term you used was "insane Indian immigrant.
Also, the reason I think your gripes against me are racially motivated comes from an observation of your attitude over a period of time. A lot of things you have said in here, your bias displayed on numerous occasions, all convince me that you might be racist in your thinking.
You asked me for examples, and I gave them to you.
No, you didn't. I asked you for examples and all you've produced is the fact that I referred to you as an Indian (which, last I checked, is the correct term for your nationality and contains no negative undertones), and that you've made an "observation of my attitude." (which is entirely vague and I'm quite sure is supported by, well, nothing)
I don't suppose you see how warped your logic is, so I'll explain it to you: had I merely called you an Indian, you might not particularly care, because I called you "insane" in the same sentence, you think you can use it as ammunition. But by that rationale, anyway who dislikes you while simultaneously acknowleding your race is therefore racist.
As I stated before, this is a very desperate accusation.
That's very quaint, but I hardly think this is an issue to make light of. The fact that you do make light of an issue as serious as this is further evidence of either your immaturity or your racial bias or, possibly, both.
The statement made light of YOU. You toss out accusations on a whim. Ever hear of the phrase "demonstrating absurdity by being absurd"? That's precisely what I was doing; demonstrating how keen you are to seize anything and everything that you think might help your case, no matter how far you have to stretch to do it.
I come in here to chat with people--this is recreation, not business, for me. I discuss political issues in informal conversation, kind of like one would discuss politics in a bar or in an office rec room. It's not my intention to come in here to pursue dissertation studies in political science! You don't seem to have anything else to do other than spend your time researching every trivial issue in the planet!
One minute I'm being lectured on a serious social issue, the next I'm being told I shouldn't go around researching claims about war, the economy, and the current administration. Hey, let's play "spot the hypocriscy."
That said, what you're saying really amounts to "quit ruining my speculative political claims with facts." If you don't like the high level with which most of us hold ourselves to in regards to the truth of our words, then you're in the wrong place. We take it seriously -- clearly, you do not.
The fact that you have to ruin every single attempt on my part to start a discussion in this vein reflects on the fact that you are probably a college nerd with no social life and nothing better to do than gripe over nonsense with anyone you happen to dislike, more often than not, as a consequence of your own prejudices.
If you can't attack the arguments, attack the person who makes 'em, eh? I guess I was more spot-on than I realized when I said you were behaving desperately. Anyway, I'm not in college and I'll be damned if I'm gonna be lectured on social matters from a single 34 year old who spends hours every day trying to find ways he can save face on an Internet movie forum.
You have pretty consistently displayed the propensity to alienate pretty much anyone you happen to disagree with politically.
Ahem... Sir Toose...disagrees with me on abortion.
Caitlyn...ditto.
LordSlaytan...likewise.
firegod...when he was around, we'd do nothing but argue about God, morality, and politics.
OG-...we disagree on issues of God, evolution, abortion, and assorted other political matters.
Steve...the war on Iraq is virtually the only political issue we've ever agreed on.
Pidzilla, Monkeypunch...both disagree with me on virtually every political and social issue there is.
The Silver Bullet...disagrees with me on damn near everything...in terms of politics AND cinema. One of the few things we agree on, ironically, is you.
All you have voiced are your suspicions. There is no hard evidence to back up any of your claims.
Yes, there is. As I've already stated, a new user cannot post here until they have confirmed their account...and to confirm their account, they need access to the email address they signed up under. Therefore, unless someone broke into your email account, you were, in fact, at least two of the aliases in question.
Well, whatever the circumstances might be, facts are facts. All you can offer are hypotheses of what might have been. To which, all I can say is that speculations prove nothing.
If speculation proves nothing, then you've no place declaring him the most popular President ever.
Ridiculous. FDR's New Deal, involving the creation of new jobs in the public sector to stimulate consumer demand and, thereby, the economy, by injecting cash into the economy is the very essence of Keynesian demand-side economics.
You've stated this before, but have, up to this point, been completely unable to explain how hiring more government employees "injects cash" into the economy. You've also yet to provide even the most minute of valid objections to my complaints about Keynesianism as a long-term economic policy.
Seems to me that you have developed a habit of making hollow declarations without being substantiated by the facts!
I guess that goes hand in hand with your claim that I exhaustively researching issues, even down to the most insignificant trivialities?
You may claim to have won the debate all you like and claim that I am ignorant or misinformed, or that I fail to provide a basis for my arguments, but ALL THESE CLAIMS are, quite simply, WRONG!!! They are baseless, fallacious claims that only UNDERMINE YOUR CREDIBILITY!!!
You spend as much time talking about how right you are as you do actually making arguments in support of it.
Well, I hardly said you were cleverly persuasive. You are, most certainly, devoid of charisma and intelligence--a singularly dull, monotonous drudge of an individual, if I might add. At your age, I would be out there having a good time instead of carrying on endlessly over pointless nonsense like a drone from hell! You probably have no social life, either, and I can see why! People must run the heck away from you! The fact is, being forum admin (and a singularly biased, immature admin at that) hardly makes you responsible or mature. If anyone has displayed a lack of maturity or responsibility for their actions in here, it is yourself. Your age excuses that, but, in that case, you shouldn't be administrating on the content of this forum either. In your position, I would stick to the technical issues, where I would be competent, and give someone a lot more mature the reigns of handling the content. And concerning our age differences, I happen to be a light-hearted, fun-loving guy who happens to know how to have a good time. On the other hand, you are a singularly dull, monotonous, officious, boring drudge who probably has cobwebs growing out of his ears, at the same time, being too immature to handle the responsibility he has taken on. If anyone is disturbed about our age differences, that is probably the reason, I might venture to suggest.
A number of people have commented on the maturity issue, not one of them favorably to you. You might venture to suggest something more accurate. And you might venture to grow up...but I'm not holding my breath.
shooot.em.down.
07-02-03, 07:40 AM
maybe django is just some poor misunderstood human (im sure some of you highly doubt this) and he only looks for attention because he can't get it from anyone else.
but i wouldn't know..
Django, if you want Chris to stop arguing with you and insisting on facts and answers like a well-informed debater would have, then maybe you shouldn't have created this thread in the first place!! It's like a kid whining for ice cream all day and when he finally gets it he complains about too much.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.