|
|
Posted by selaboc on 04/03/06 11:56
Duggy wrote:
> selaboc wrote:
> > Duggy wrote:
> > > c64fan@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > No it wasn't so no it doesn't.
> > > You're the only one still making that claim.
> > > > All of the blame is yours.
> > > No.
> > Sorry, but it STILL is all yours.
>
> Isn't.
*IS*
> > > > It wasn't ambiguious, just because you refuse to admit it doesn't
> > > > change that fact.
> > > It was, and you know it.
> > It wasn't and you know it.
>
> Was.
wasn't
> > > > Since the only one lying here is you.
> > > Sentence fragment.
> > yes it was. Noticed it after I posted. Didn't care enough to post a
> > correction.
>
> Fair enough. Why is it mistakes are far more obvious the second you
> hit send?
One of life's ironies
> > > > Better than your fanatsy.
> > > Your reality
> > *IS* the real reality.
>
> Isn't.
*IS*
> > > is a better fantasy than my fantasy, yeah. But at least
> > > my reality is real.
> > In your dreams.
>
> No. In my dreams is fantasy. My reality is real.
You're deluded,
> > > Because I love you.
> > Sorry, I don't swing that way.
>
> You like men?
No Paul, I don't. I like women. Which a troll-boy like you isn't.
> > > No, I think the most vocal and abusive time I did was, though.
> > liar
>
> Nope.
Yep.
Or should I be saying Duck season?
> > So you claim. Google tells the story of what did happen, not what you
> > wish happened.
>
> Google agrees with me.
>
> > really!
>
> Not really.
Yes, really!
> > Read in context.
>
> The context wasn't helpful.
Yes it was. the following sentence (part of the context) was an
amplification on the idea which, had you applied some simple math
skills, would have told you that the poster was NOT talking about 40
extra when he said 52 extra.
> > You do know what context is, since you claim to have
> > an English degree, one would assume that is something (along with
> > reading comprehension)
>
> You say I don't have that. Which is it?
Apparently you don't, which is why I said if you did, it would have
been something you would have to have learned. Since you obviously
didn't learn it, your claims to a degree appear ficticious. You want me
to believe you have a degree, start showing some comprehension and
understanding of context.
> > you'd have to have learned in order to get one.
> > It's the lack of evidence that you have learned those things (based
> > solely on the posts you've made) that lead me to the conclusion that
> > your degree is ficticious.
>
> Your conclusion is false. That's hardly unsual.
You are wrong, as usual.
> > Why do you think it worries me? I'm not the one demanding acceptance
> > from others.
>
> Then who is?
you are the one demanding acceptance by stalking me across the net and
making up lies about me.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|