ThxOne
Premium Member
Staff Member
That is not a comprehension issue. That is me ignoring your lies.COMPREHENSION, kid. "NO ONE" is buying it.
That is not a comprehension issue. That is me ignoring your lies.COMPREHENSION, kid. "NO ONE" is buying it.
Should we take a poll?That is not a comprehension issue. That is me ignoring your lies.
Rob I have been triggering you since last night. Do you remember me listing the post number? That is when I posted that in my sig when I decided to trigger you. You are easy.Should we take a poll?
In the meantime, go toe-to-toe with Jimi on your misunderstanding of the words "ironic" and "tautology".
I could use a laugh.
Or have the multiple discussions of "ironic" just been your ploy all along to "trigger" me? HAHAHAHA
Again, no one is falling for it, kid. You have demonstrated far too many times that you are not bright enough to pull off even the simplest of "scams" like that.Rob I have been triggering you since last night. Do you remember me listing the post number? That is when I posted that in my sig when I decided to trigger you. You are easy.
Oft times in your case, it's this one:What is Irony?
Quick Reminder of What Irony Is
Irony is a rhetorical device in which the appearance of something is opposite to its reality.
There are four main types of irony: verbal irony, dramatic irony, situational irony, and Socratic irony. Socratic irony is not a literary device, and therefore we will not be looking at examples, but it is worth being aware of.
Tell me guys, which version are you using?
- Verbal Irony is when a speaker says one thing but means something entirely different. The literal meaning is at odds with the intended meaning.
- Dramatic Irony is when the audience knows something that the characters don’t.
- Situational Irony is when what happens is the opposite of what you expect.
- Socratic Irony is when a person feigns ignorance in order to get another to admit to knowing or doing something. It is named after Socrates, the Greek philosopher, who used this technique to tease information out of his students.
Listen to you. Not bright enough because YOU say so. Backpedaling because YOU say so. Seems to be a common thread here........ you huge ego.Again, no one is falling for it, kid. You have demonstrated far too many times that you are not bright enough to pull off even the simplest of "scams" like that.
Too many times you have tried to backpedal on your mistakes and claimed you were being "metaphorical" (incorrect use of the word) or "humorous" (by saying nothing that could remotely be seen as funny) or "trying to trigger" someone.
The list of errors is far too long and makes you look far to dumb to be intentional.
Unless your goal all along was to appear not to know? I guess that's possible.
a 'la Keyser Söze
What is actually ironic is the FACT that I have done none of that.Oft times in your case, it's this one:
For example, you cry that no one is having conversation with you, but when someone tries to have a conversation with you, you refuse.
- Situational Irony is when what happens is the opposite of what you expect.
Or this one: You claim to be an expert in biology, then refuse to accept medical fact that has been know for over a century. Then you double-down and claim the facts weren't know when you were is school.
Or this one: You complain about the rising cost of gas, but then claim that historical gas prices have no place in the discussion of rising costs.
Given your opener on all three, one would not expect the closer that you provide. it is the "opposite of what you expect".
Awww, did I trigger you again?Before you spend all day trying to prove me wrong just stop.
I don't "cry" when you don't have a conversation. *******.
I never, not once, "claimed" to be an "expert" in biology. *******.
I didn't "complain" about the rising cost of gas and then claim historical prices have no place. *******.
If you paid attention in the least instead of being an ******* you might catch on.
Glad you again, refuse to pay attention. *******. Do you remember why I call you names? Probably not. You are after all, stupid.Awww, did I trigger you again?
I sure can post proof of what I say about you.
1. You have cried about conversation plenty, and have done it recently, in fact. Would you prefer I said you "whine" about it?
2. You VERY specifically suggested there is no difference between you with your degree and professionals who have been in the field for years. To paraphrase: "what makes them any more an expert than ME?"
3. You have complained about the rising cost of gas more times than I can remember. When I talked about real pricing, you very clearly said historical prices have NOTHING to do with what you pay today.
You memory is not that good. If you want to challenge me on mine, I can find your posts and share them.
Neither one of you understand.
If it is MY vote, it can't be wrong. It's not up to anyone to tell ME that MY vote is wrong no matter the reason I choose to make that vote. My vote doesn't have to be approved by you or Rob to be correct.
Now you are shifting the original topic even further away so you can still be correct in your argument. Have fun with that.It could be wrong - see Gore/hanging chads.
I didn't say anybody need to approve and endorse your vote. I gave a clear example of a "wrong" vote and it didn't involve anybody approving anything. Here is less hypothetical examples, I voted to legalize MMJ in Colorado. Now that there 3 pot shops walking distance from house, domicile and the schools my children attend for education. I'm not so thrilled with that vote. I'm sure there are Dems out there thinking, "man I should have voted for anybody but Bumbling Biden in the primaries." People make wrongly incorrect decisions (including votes) all the time and merely because it was your vote or your decision doesn't make it a correct infallible choice.
The problem with my idea of what is a "wrong" vote is that I think people should vote based on facts; IOW they should make a well informed educated decision. Clearly the majority of people vote based on emotional feelings and maybe 1/2 the facts at best.
Look at you getting all triggered and going ad hominem yet again.Glad you again, refuse to pay attention. *******. Do you remember why I call you names? Probably not. You are after all, stupid.
Conversation #4 Rob is still arguing.
He is speaking DIRECTLY to your question about whether a vote can be wrong or not. He is explaining it and even using real-world examples for you.Now you are shifting the original topic even further away so you can still be correct in your argument. Have fun with that.