Days After Santa Fe’s Dem Mayor Bans City Employees Frm Travelling To Anti-LGBT State

[SgtSpiderMan]

So, removing the sweeping generalization and stating that you "Rarely (if ever) take a stated position on an issue." would make that statement accurate?

No, that's not the problem that you have.

 

[Que]

No, that's not the problem that you have.

I have no problem at all with my ammended statement. It is factually accurate. Do you have any examples of your posts where you take an actual, stated position on an issue?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I have no problem at all with my ammended statement. It is factually accurate. Do you have any examples of your posts where you take an actual, stated position on an issue?

It's actually your claim, and you know how these things work, the burden falls onto you to prove that it's rare. Looking forward to your response and you avoiding the topic.

 

[Que]

It's actually your claim, and you know how these things work, the burden falls onto you to prove that it's rare. Looking forward to your response and you avoiding the topic.

No, that isn't how it works. One cannot "prove" a negative. If I, personally have never seen you take a position on an issue, short of regurgitating every post you have ever made on the GB and having Price Waterhouse certify that few (if any) show you stating a position on an issue it is not provable.

On the other hand, you are intimately familiar with each and every post, yes? Refuting my observation about your habit of avoiding stating a position on issues should be rather simple.

Surely you can recall a handful of issues (or even one?) where you clearly stated your position on the issue or issues?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

No, that isn't how it works. One cannot "prove" a negative. If I, personally have never seen you take a position on an issue, short of regurgitating every post you have ever made on the GB and having Price Waterhouse certify that few (if any) show you stating a position on an issue it is not provable.

On the other hand, you are intimately familiar with each and every post, yes? Refuting my observation about your habit of avoiding stating a position on issues should be rather simple.

Surely you can recall a handful of issues (or even one?) where you clearly stated your position on the issue or issues?

Then you're up a creek by taking on a position you can never prove, a position you were totally comfortable with moments ago.

I have no problem at all with my ammended statement.

 

[Que]

Then you're up a creek by taking on a position you can never prove, a position you were totally comfortable with moments ago.

And I still have no problem staking out my position that you rarely (if ever) state your actual position on any issue.

What would you consider a reasonable sample size to study your tendency to avoid staking out an articulated position on an issue. I looked at the last 25 posts. 12.5% of the readilly available posts. If you took an actual, stated position on an issue, I was not able to find it. I would call 0 out of 25 "rare to never."

Notably, I did see several examples of where you defined other posters positions for them, and a couple of examples where, when pressed to define your position, you declined.

My favorite, though, was where you defined a poster's position inaccurately deliberately, in order to almost state your position by "agreeing" with the distortion that you created.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that although you did not write a declaritive statement of just your own position, your position there can be determined. Let's call that 1/25.

Did I miss any others?

 

[smartjuanxxx]

I have no problem at all with my ammended statement. It is factually accurate. Do you have any examples of your posts where you take an actual, stated position on an issue?

what he ALWAYS does is pretend the story isnt true, didnt say what its said

or take the GOAL POST and replace it with a pop corn maker and says

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME

 

[smartjuanxxx]

Juan would AXE, is the SF shitties, are UNISEX bathrooms mandated in MOOSEFUCK schools...stores....etc

We KNOW the answer!

 

[Que]

what he ALWAYS does is pretend the story isnt true, didnt say what its said

or take the GOAL POST and replace it with a pop corn maker and says

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME

The very first time I attempted to ascertain his actual position on an issue, he bobbed an weaved with his now familiar to me, "I didn't say that" while glibly telling me what I mean, a wise(ass) poster said to me, "You do realize that you are arguing with a mushroom?"

I go back and forth between believing that his schtick is performance art, or the earnest effort of the most obtusely obdurate man on the planet.

 

[smartjuanxxx]

The very first time I attempted to ascertain his actual position on an issue, he bobbed an weaved with his now familiar to me, "I didn't say that" while glibly telling me what I mean, a wise(ass) poster said to me, "You do realize that you are arguing with a mushroom?"

I go back and forth between believing that his schtick is performance art, or the earnest effort of the most obtusely obdurate man on the planet.

This.....

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Did I miss any others?

Nope, I think you nailed it when you said this,

I was not able to find it.

You conveniently forget that for years I've clearly said you don't read well, this is continuing proof of that.

Our conversations usually start with you jumping in on something I've said to something else and assigning me a position I've never adopted, me pointing out that you're debating a position you've ascribed me, me clarifying my statement, and you ascribing another position that I've never adopted. Much like you did last night, when I said that Bill Nye was more qualified than most as a knowledgeable person on science, you came back with,

Why do you feel that those that are tried as war criminals should not receive jail time? Are you saying that they should be summarily executed instead? Or are you saying that no punishment should be meted out? You need to clarify.

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1300892
It's pointless engaging you because you're not able to discuss the topic you respond to.

 

[WalksOnWater]

.....

 

[miles]

Spidey in a discussion is just like Abbott and Costello doing "Who's On First."

 

[Que]

Nope, I think you nailed it when you said this,


You conveniently forget that for years I've clearly said you don't read well, this is continuing proof of that.

Our conversations usually start with you jumping in on something I've said to something else and assigning me a position I've never adopted, me pointing out that you're debating a position you've ascribed me, me clarifying my statement, and you ascribing another position that I've never adopted. Much like you did last night, when I said that Bill Nye was more qualified than most as a knowledgeable person on science, you came back with,


http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1300892
It's pointless engaging you because you're not able to discuss the topic you respond to.

Finally! You correctly characterized your posting style. Why is it that you can do clearly see and characterixe it when I mimic it in satire, but not in your daily postings?

BTW, you incorrectly identified the post of yours that I responded to, and also mischaracterized what it wad that you actually said in the post that you think I responded to.

Not that it matters.

Of course they are all "positions you have never adopted" since as I point out, you steadfastly refuse to adopt positions on nearly any issue you wade in on.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Finally! You correctly characterized your posting style. Why is it that you can do clearly see and characterixe it when I mimic it in satire, but not in your daily postings?

BTW, you incorrectly identified the post of yours that I responded to, and also mischaracterized what it wad that you actually said in the post that you think I responded to.

Not that it matters.

Of course they are all "positions you have never adopted" since as I point out, you steadfastly refuse to adopt positions on nearly any issue you wade in on.

You did it again. I post a clear position on a subject and you ascribe me a different position and debate that because you don't read well. Please let me know how clear I need to be for you to understand.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And I still have no problem staking out my position that you rarely (if ever) state your actual position on any issue.

What would you consider a reasonable sample size to study your tendency to avoid staking out an articulated position on an issue. I looked at the last 25 posts. 12.5% of the readilly available posts. If you took an actual, stated position on an issue, I was not able to find it. I would call 0 out of 25 "rare to never."

Notably, I did see several examples of where you defined other posters positions for them, and a couple of examples where, when pressed to define your position, you declined.

My favorite, though, was where you defined a poster's position inaccurately deliberately, in order to almost state your position by "agreeing" with the distortion that you created.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that although you did not write a declaritive statement of just your own position, your position there can be determined. Let's call that 1/25.

Did I miss any others?

*chuckle*

Nothing highlights your point any better than his actions in this thread.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You did it again. I post a clear position on a subject and you ascribe me a different position and debate that because you don't read well. Please let me know how clear I need to be for you to understand.

I've been following this thread and that's just wrong.

 

[smartjuanxxx]

Bathroom Bill Sponsor is a Convicted Sex Offender Who Molested Boys


The brouhaha in North Carolina over efforts in the City of Charlotte to allow mentally ill transgendered people to use restroom facilities that are designated as those opposite of their birth gender faced a strange twist when it was discovered that the man behind leading the charge for the bill is not only a sodomite, but also a convicted sex offender.

 

[JohnnySavage]

A Sodomite?

BB goes biblical!

 

[miles]

Cirque du Solei Cancels North Carolina Shows Over Public Facilities Act — Plans Shows In Dubai, Where Gays Are Put to Death.

I guess libs are okay with Muslims murdering gay people.