goodhelmet Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 I agree.... Jerry, if you are going to bow out... bow the fuck out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 Now you're just piling on and looking for a fight. Damn right I am. Declaring victory when you're on the losing end of an argument and then running away is a bitch move. Why shouldn't he get shit over it? Personally, I'm hoping jdw finishes the job. I just wanted to keep Jerry in play long enough for that to happen. SLL, I'm not going to be drawn back into the debate. I can't draw you back. That would require you to not still be in it. I do think my position is extremely clear. And I think Jim Varney is a misunderstood comic genius. Doesn't mean other people are gonna see it that way. I've also given you the sources of why I'm thinking about things in the way that I am, why I think an emphasis on "product" and product alone is misplaced. Which means very little to me if YOU can't back up your claims yourself. I am posting now only to point out that in the first quotation you've pulled out there, I'm not arguing anything, I'm putting forward what I suspected jdw and others would say. And lo and behold, they did go ahead and said it. The second thing you pulled out is part of what I'm arguing. I don't know if you've noticed but jdw and I have been on polar opposite ends of this debate. It's not a surprise that the argument I suspected he would come out with and the one that I am putting forward are "mutually exclusive". We don't agree. The argument was "does poor quality product cause people to stop following said product". For this argument to even happen, there has to be basic agreement between both sides as to what is meant by the term "quality". Not only was that not the case here, you knew it was not the case, are saying exactly that to me, and yet still declare some sort of victory. There are a few possibilities here. One is that you are really, really, really dumb. Like "I'm not sure we should be letting this guy outside without a helmet" dumb. If jdw says that products fail due to poor quality as he defines it, and you note that products of of poor quality succeed using a completely different definition of the term, how does that prove anything about jdw's claim, or about the idea in general? You're a doctor of English. Why am I having to explain this to you? Are degrees really that meaningless in the 21st century that any bozo off the street can be a doctor of English? Or are you actually as smart as one would think you are...in which case you are being massively dishonest. Maybe not knowingly dishonest, but if you're smart enough that you should see the holes in your argument but mysteriously don't, and then run away (kinda) when there's too much scrutiny from others, I can't help but see an act of deception. What's "smarter than the room" got to do with anything? This.... my general feeling is that I'm posting on a board where everyone knows more about wrestling than I do Except for here, where apparently no one knows more about wrestling than you do. Or the thread about the roster depth in 80's WWF vs 80's Crockett, where no one knew more about wrestling than you do. Or all those misguided souls who still don't get that the in-ring part of wrestling isn't an especially big deal. my general feeling is that I'm posting on a board where everyone knows more about wrestling than I do If I have to ask twice, it probably means you don't want other people to know the answer, but...do you still believe that? Especially when it's jdw who has a habit of speaking down to me, and not the other way around. jdw - amongst others - speak down to you because you're an impossibly thick, arrogant, know-nothing know-it-all who refuses to so much as consider the possibility that you might actually be wrong about something, even with overwhelming evidence against you. It seems like every other thread you're in - including this one - starts out with people - including jdw - politely explaining things to you, but the second it starts to sound like your idea might be wrong, you go on the defensive. "Oh, but obviously I'm only doing that because I think I'm right." But you're not always right. And you are sometimes very obviously wrong. And you are frequently unwilling/unable to recognize when you are very obviously wrong. And you treat everyone like idiots who need to learn from your superior wisdom regardless of whether or not what you are saying has even the slightest hint of validity. And that makes you come off as an overbearing, pompous douchebag. Speaking from personal experience, you can't be a overbearing, pompous douchebag and not expect others to talk down to you. When did he take a shot at S.L.L.? He didn't. Does he need to take a specific shot at me for me to point out that he's being an idiot? Honestly, I would've gotten involved sooner but.... A. jdw, Dylan, Johnny and others had it pretty well covered B. I actually have been trying to dial back the angry rhetoric a bit lately. Even I was getting a little tired of it. All the same, me stepping back didn't really change anything. I mean, if Jerry says something stupid in the woods, and I'm not around to make fun of it, it's still stupid. More to the point, other, frankly more qualified individuals kept pointing out how stupid he's being. So if Jerry is going to keep riling people up with his idiocy independently of my presence, I don't see how my piling on makes things worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 Alright, going to pull a Loss and lock this thread. At this point, it isn't about the argument but the poster and nothing good can come from this point forward... not even an awesome Happy Days post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts