Total Posts:31|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

How can anyone lose 102 debates and win 9 ?

Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:35:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Persistence.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:42:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
She's in the 96th freakin percentile. We need to change our rating system.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 2:14:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 2:08:54 AM, FREEDO wrote:
I've pointed her out before. I believe somebody said she was mass vote-bombed.

Yeah, seriously, just look at her debates. It's NYCDiesel, Tatarize and Mangani vote-bombing her over and over again.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 2:17:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
wow, this website really used to be infested with @$$holes.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 2:37:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 2:33:20 AM, jimtimmy wrote:
I just gave the 0-67 guy his first win... I am so nice

That win was something he forfeited.

You gave him Conduct.

CONDUCT.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 2:38:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 1:36:16 AM, BlackVoid wrote:
I don't mean to one-up you, but

http://www.debate.org...

This one is the Izbo of 2009. I don't know why some of these people bother.

At 8/29/2011 1:31:06 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

What's crazy about her is that she actually debates. I dunno
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 11:44:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
These people along with the people who votebombed that girl made this site interesting. Definitely more interesting than it is now. The site has gone way, way downhill since I first joined (around late 2008 sometime.)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 11:45:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 11:44:51 AM, LeafRod wrote:
These people along with the people who votebombed that girl made this site interesting. Definitely more interesting than it is now. The site has gone way, way downhill since I first joined (around late 2008 sometime.)

So the vote bombing and general lack of integrety in voting made the site better, in your opinion?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 11:52:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 11:50:20 AM, LeafRod wrote:
I didn't say that at all. Please formulate an appropriate response and try again.

He gave you a much more patient and appropriate response than I was about to give you, and you replied with this meaningless retort.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 11:59:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 11:53:14 AM, LeafRod wrote:
A patient and appropriate response is one that has nothing to do with what I said?

You: the people who votebombed that girl made this site interesting. Definitely more interesting than it is now.

Ore_Ele: So the vote bombing and general lack of integrety in voting made the site better, in your opinion?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 12:45:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
You really can't see it?

"the people [who votebombed]... made this site interesting"

"so the vote bombing... made this site better, in your opinion"

Get your eyesight checked.

And while I'm on that note, both those people and the two people who lost a lot of debates were ridiculed in this thread by exactly the same boring people who care too much about the "integrity" of this site. There used to be a lot of people here who wouldn't have great records or would go around doing odd things because it was funnier and provided far more character to the site.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 12:56:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 11:44:51 AM, LeafRod wrote:
These people along with the people who votebombed that girl made this site interesting. Definitely more interesting than it is now. The site has gone way, way downhill since I first joined (around late 2008 sometime.)

You're implying that the votebombing made the site interesting, very interesting. And that the site has gone way downhill since the time you joined.

Basic understanding of communication tells us that those two sentences are related.

Like if I said, "My mother just died. I'm happy." While it is possible that the "I'm happy" could be attributed to any unsaid factor in my life, it is generally understood that the "I'm happy" refers to the previous sentence.

As such, your comment of "the site has gone way downhill" is assumed to be in reference to your previous sentence regarding the votebombers making the site interesting.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 12:58:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 12:45:35 PM, LeafRod wrote:
You really can't see it?

"the people [who votebombed]... made this site interesting"

"so the vote bombing... made this site better, in your opinion"

Get your eyesight checked.

And while I'm on that note, both those people and the two people who lost a lot of debates were ridiculed in this thread by exactly the same boring people who care too much about the "integrity" of this site. There used to be a lot of people here who wouldn't have great records or would go around doing odd things because it was funnier and provided far more character to the site.

What semantic nonsense. The obvious implication of those words was that votebombing, and such behavior exhibited by people made the site fun. While you did say that THE PEOPLE made the site fun, it was the obvious inference that it was their acts of votebombing and the like that allowed them to make the site fun. Why else would you have mentioned it?

You and I both know thats what you meant, and your dancing around on semantic logic does not fool either of us.

Furthermore, if you want a social and funny website, go elsewhere. As this is debate.org, debates and voting must be taken seriously, lest this site default on its purpose. The improvements taken to remedy that issue make this website so great right now. The fact that you come here expecting great laughs and not real debates with real voting results is what I find rather stupid, and the fact that you got tenaciously defensive at Ore_ele's very patient comment is what leaves me dumbstruck.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:21:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
No, it's not obvious. Unless you're forgotten your own comments, you might recall that you just said the site used to be filled with [word]. You seem to think that just because some other poster said three guys votebombed some other person, they suck. Yeah right. I'm saying "those people who votebombed" because how else would I refer to them? Their only distinction in this thread is having votebombed and having been called something by you. So, those people, whom you would only recognize as having votebombed in the context of the thread, made this site interesting.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:25:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 1:21:18 PM, LeafRod wrote:
No, it's not obvious. Unless you're forgotten your own comments, you might recall that you just said the site used to be filled with [word]. You seem to think that just because some other poster said three guys votebombed some other person, they suck. Yeah right. I'm saying "those people who votebombed" because how else would I refer to them? Their only distinction in this thread is having votebombed and having been called something by you. So, those people, whom you would only recognize as having votebombed in the context of the thread, made this site interesting.

And you're leaving them in that context, which means we have to assume the same context is continued in your next sentence.

Either way, it is a moot point now. Whether directly or indirectly, you've said that is not what you meant. My only issue is that rather than saying "no that's not what I meant, I meant this...", you sent out a mild quip about it, when it was interpreted correctly.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:25:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 12:56:46 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Like if I said, "My mother just died. I'm happy." While it is possible that the "I'm happy" could be attributed to any unsaid factor in my life, it is generally understood that the "I'm happy" refers to the previous sentence.

Personally, I would say "oh, what circumstances could surround your mother's death that would still make you happy?"

Of course, in the world of Ore_Ele, you would say "so, you swine, what makes you happy your mother died?"

Votebombing isn't obviously close to a death, but both could be considered negative. So, the appropriate, sensible reaction would be to read more into the comment, as opposed to taking the most literal (and stupid) interpretation and immediately taking an accusatory town.
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:26:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 1:25:28 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
My only issue is that rather than saying "no that's not what I meant, I meant this...", you sent out a mild quip about it, when it was interpreted correctly.

No, it wasn't interpreted correctly. And if you have issues with a "mild quip," then relax.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:30:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 1:25:31 PM, LeafRod wrote:
At 8/29/2011 12:56:46 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Like if I said, "My mother just died. I'm happy." While it is possible that the "I'm happy" could be attributed to any unsaid factor in my life, it is generally understood that the "I'm happy" refers to the previous sentence.

Personally, I would say "oh, what circumstances could surround your mother's death that would still make you happy?"

Of course, in the world of Ore_Ele, you would say "so, you swine, what makes you happy your mother died?"

Votebombing isn't obviously close to a death, but both could be considered negative. So, the appropriate, sensible reaction would be to read more into the comment, as opposed to taking the most literal (and stupid) interpretation and immediately taking an accusatory town.

Where did anything similar to "you swine" come into the picture?

I said, "So the vote bombing and general lack of integrety in voting made the site better, in your opinion?"

That is basically saying "So you're happy that your mother died?" which is much closer to "oh, what circumstances could surround your mother's death that would still make you happy?" then to that swine comment.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:37:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 1:30:28 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
That is basically saying "So you're happy that your mother died?" which is much closer to "oh, what circumstances could surround your mother's death that would still make you happy?" then to that swine comment.

Haha fine forget the swine bit, I was joking around.

No, "so you're happy that your mother died" is an absolutely absurdly accusatory comment and would be exceptionally rude and insulting in such a situation. It's not at all close to "what circumstances could surround your mother's death that would still make you happy," because that comment supposes that the person has his or her reasons for being happy and doesn't automatically assume and accuse the person of being happy specifically because his or her mother died.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:41:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/29/2011 1:37:56 PM, LeafRod wrote:
At 8/29/2011 1:30:28 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
That is basically saying "So you're happy that your mother died?" which is much closer to "oh, what circumstances could surround your mother's death that would still make you happy?" then to that swine comment.

Haha fine forget the swine bit, I was joking around.

No, "so you're happy that your mother died" is an absolutely absurdly accusatory comment and would be exceptionally rude and insulting in such a situation. It's not at all close to "what circumstances could surround your mother's death that would still make you happy," because that comment supposes that the person has his or her reasons for being happy and doesn't automatically assume and accuse the person of being happy specifically because his or her mother died.

Of course it supposes. That is how language works. Sentences retain their context of previous sentences. It allows us to not have to continuely restate context in every sentence.

If I said, "I got a raise. I'm happy. I plan to celebrate." We all know what that means, you don't have to ask "oh, what are you celebrating?" And I shouldn't have to say "I got a raise. I'm happy that I got a raise. I plan to celebrate getting a raise."

The context carries over in general conversation.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2011 1:50:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
There's a difference between "[good event happened]; I'm happy" and "people who did [possibly bad event] made this site interesting." In addition the second comment was in response to one that said "this site used to be filled with [insult]" in reference to those people who did [possibly bad event]."