Menu
Forum
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Classifieds Member Feedback
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Register
Forum
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
What’s new
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Car Audio Discussion
General Car Audio
SQ..what is it?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ctesibius" data-source="post: 6310049" data-attributes="member: 564131"><p>Well, if there is a "right" and a "wrong", then there is a "win" and a "lose" based on your ability to defend which side of the disagreement your position should appropriately fall on. So, either there is a "win" by demonstrating you are "right", or if there is no "win" then there is no "right" which makes the past few pages just as senseless as they first appear. You previously said this wasn't about "winning", as it wasn't a competition, thus it isn't possible to prove you or I am "right" as proving we're "right" would require a "win".</p><p></p><p>I'm a little weathered from trying to follow your continually circular logic on matters such as these, so I guess right now I'm not sure how to respond other than to say at this point we are going around in circles so don't expect me to respond to this thread again after this post.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You're right. I'm so in love with arguing that I exited the thread only to be begged back into by yourself. So who here is in love with arguing? The one who left or the one who requested it continue? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif</p><p></p><p></p><p><em>I </em>don't have to prove anything to anyone. You do a sufficient job of that yourself.</p><p></p><p></p><p>1) That was not my very first comment here. My very first comment here is on page 1 of this thread, long before you entered.</p><p></p><p>2) Other than my tongue-in-cheek comment, I didn't comment about anything at all on your position on the topic until <em>you</em> responded to <em>my</em> post with the intent of offensiveness. So who is attempting to bring who into an argument? I who responded to the topic of the thread with my own thoughts, or you who initiated this discussion by offensively responding to my thoughts? Who intended to put who down under the pretense of arguing their point?</p><p></p><p>You have a very deluded way viewing things so that it is always yourself who is on the defense or under attack. Must be that egotistical, narcissistic and paranoid personality showing it's ugly head.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Or, I knew what you were going to say, thus you could no longer say it //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif</p><p></p><p></p><p>No, I realized I was talking to a brick wall after repeating myself 4 times. After having described my position in detail multiple times I realized that continuing to argue over this was fruitless as I had clearly stated my position for anyone to read.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I gave up on a mature and rational debate long ago, when it was evident you couldn't conduct yourself in such a manor. It's funny how you jump into sarcastic dumbass mode from the get-go, then wonder why no one wants to carry on a "rational and intelligent" debate with you.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You are here now trying to "engage me" on the topic only after you realized you made a complete fool of yourself. I guess if you wanted a mature and rational debate on the topic, you should have followed that road first rather than the sarcastic dumbass mode you so easily and quickly fell into.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't say so. You've demonstrated such.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Think what you will, but I've corroborated my feelings with others //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif Not naming names as it's not important who.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You initiate this conversation with a negative reply to my post and a complete inability to carry on a mature discussion, and I'm the instigator with flame fest motives. Again your logic is infallible.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Your examples only demonstrate you don't understand my point, not the other way around.</p><p></p><p></p><p>So after pages of your mindless, sarcastic drivel I'm supposed to just jump into a rational debate with you on your say so? My points on the matter are clearly stated in this thread, continuing to restate them on the basis of "rational discussion" with a clearly irrational individual is pointless.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's been stated here four times. It's apparently not worth your effort to go back and reread what is already wrote rather than go round in circles continuously.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Doesn't that exactly describe your comments at the very beginning of the debate?</p><p></p><p>Luckily you've already armed me with an appropriate response here;</p><p></p><p>At some point I just have to start being a smart ***, as that's my defense mechanism against stupidity and/or incoherence.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You created that position by default of your viewpoint. Your inability to continue to defend your position shows just how fragile your viewpoint is.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You first //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif</p><p></p><p>I've responded to all of your points that I can recall. You, however, avoid mine.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Which is exactly why I am <em>again</em> not responding after this post. No sense when it just continues to fuel your ego and nothing else constructive is accomplished.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I have responded to your points. You, however, avoid my points claiming "they are not your own" when they are 100% consistent with your viewpoint. And then you claim to not comprehend the simply metaphors I applied in again another attempt to avoid it.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You're right. I left the thread because I want to argue with you. Oh, wait......</p><p></p><p>And then you beg me to come back. Who's intent on arguing here?</p><p></p><p></p><p>You are seriously not getting it. Now I understand why you default to sarcastic dumbass mode.....you can't carry on a rational debate.</p><p></p><p>Please tell me my descriptions are not an accurate portrayal. You defend the technical definition of the term "SQ", which I accurately portrayed in my metaphor. You then said you prefer personal preference in your own system, which I again accurately portrayed. If any of this is confusing you, I'm sorry you can't follow your own side of the debate.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Nonsensical? You said it, I simply agreed part of it may be accurate //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif</p><p></p><p></p><p>Good. So how would you concisely describe your system to someone in less than 5 words?</p><p></p><p></p><p>And what in gods name makes you think everyone wants to play your ridiculous games with you?</p><p></p><p>Well, I left you begged me to come back. I would say it was your narcissistic need to continue to try to correct your failed attempt at proving your superiority that caused it.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If by hypocritical you mean utterly bored with continuing to state my point in various ways and it still being completely lost on you then yes, I guess I was being hypocritical.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ctesibius, post: 6310049, member: 564131"] Well, if there is a "right" and a "wrong", then there is a "win" and a "lose" based on your ability to defend which side of the disagreement your position should appropriately fall on. So, either there is a "win" by demonstrating you are "right", or if there is no "win" then there is no "right" which makes the past few pages just as senseless as they first appear. You previously said this wasn't about "winning", as it wasn't a competition, thus it isn't possible to prove you or I am "right" as proving we're "right" would require a "win". I'm a little weathered from trying to follow your continually circular logic on matters such as these, so I guess right now I'm not sure how to respond other than to say at this point we are going around in circles so don't expect me to respond to this thread again after this post. You're right. I'm so in love with arguing that I exited the thread only to be begged back into by yourself. So who here is in love with arguing? The one who left or the one who requested it continue? [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif[/IMG] [I]I [/I]don't have to prove anything to anyone. You do a sufficient job of that yourself. 1) That was not my very first comment here. My very first comment here is on page 1 of this thread, long before you entered. 2) Other than my tongue-in-cheek comment, I didn't comment about anything at all on your position on the topic until [I]you[/I] responded to [I]my[/I] post with the intent of offensiveness. So who is attempting to bring who into an argument? I who responded to the topic of the thread with my own thoughts, or you who initiated this discussion by offensively responding to my thoughts? Who intended to put who down under the pretense of arguing their point? You have a very deluded way viewing things so that it is always yourself who is on the defense or under attack. Must be that egotistical, narcissistic and paranoid personality showing it's ugly head. Or, I knew what you were going to say, thus you could no longer say it [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif[/IMG] No, I realized I was talking to a brick wall after repeating myself 4 times. After having described my position in detail multiple times I realized that continuing to argue over this was fruitless as I had clearly stated my position for anyone to read. I gave up on a mature and rational debate long ago, when it was evident you couldn't conduct yourself in such a manor. It's funny how you jump into sarcastic dumbass mode from the get-go, then wonder why no one wants to carry on a "rational and intelligent" debate with you. You are here now trying to "engage me" on the topic only after you realized you made a complete fool of yourself. I guess if you wanted a mature and rational debate on the topic, you should have followed that road first rather than the sarcastic dumbass mode you so easily and quickly fell into. I don't say so. You've demonstrated such. Think what you will, but I've corroborated my feelings with others [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif[/IMG] Not naming names as it's not important who. You initiate this conversation with a negative reply to my post and a complete inability to carry on a mature discussion, and I'm the instigator with flame fest motives. Again your logic is infallible. Your examples only demonstrate you don't understand my point, not the other way around. So after pages of your mindless, sarcastic drivel I'm supposed to just jump into a rational debate with you on your say so? My points on the matter are clearly stated in this thread, continuing to restate them on the basis of "rational discussion" with a clearly irrational individual is pointless. It's been stated here four times. It's apparently not worth your effort to go back and reread what is already wrote rather than go round in circles continuously. Doesn't that exactly describe your comments at the very beginning of the debate? Luckily you've already armed me with an appropriate response here; At some point I just have to start being a smart ***, as that's my defense mechanism against stupidity and/or incoherence. You created that position by default of your viewpoint. Your inability to continue to defend your position shows just how fragile your viewpoint is. You first [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif[/IMG] I've responded to all of your points that I can recall. You, however, avoid mine. Which is exactly why I am [I]again[/I] not responding after this post. No sense when it just continues to fuel your ego and nothing else constructive is accomplished. I have responded to your points. You, however, avoid my points claiming "they are not your own" when they are 100% consistent with your viewpoint. And then you claim to not comprehend the simply metaphors I applied in again another attempt to avoid it. You're right. I left the thread because I want to argue with you. Oh, wait...... And then you beg me to come back. Who's intent on arguing here? You are seriously not getting it. Now I understand why you default to sarcastic dumbass mode.....you can't carry on a rational debate. Please tell me my descriptions are not an accurate portrayal. You defend the technical definition of the term "SQ", which I accurately portrayed in my metaphor. You then said you prefer personal preference in your own system, which I again accurately portrayed. If any of this is confusing you, I'm sorry you can't follow your own side of the debate. Nonsensical? You said it, I simply agreed part of it may be accurate [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif[/IMG] Good. So how would you concisely describe your system to someone in less than 5 words? And what in gods name makes you think everyone wants to play your ridiculous games with you? Well, I left you begged me to come back. I would say it was your narcissistic need to continue to try to correct your failed attempt at proving your superiority that caused it. If by hypocritical you mean utterly bored with continuing to state my point in various ways and it still being completely lost on you then yes, I guess I was being hypocritical. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Car Audio Discussion
General Car Audio
SQ..what is it?
Top
Menu
What's new
Forum list
