ControlsFreak
No bio...
User ID: 1422
ControlsFreak
2d ago
Gotta be at least slightly less crazy than the person who has simply contradicted himself. Sure, you didn't take the strawberries. You probably also took the strawberries. Principle of explosion is a hell of a drug.
But deflect away. It's probably the best you can do if you can't manage to just curl your upper lip and go silent.
ControlsFreak
2d ago
That may be true, in the technical sense that you have affirmed a contradiction. From the principle of explosion, sure, you can probably show that to be true. Of course, you can also show the opposite to be true. And back in reality, you're not really accusing me of being a one-issue poster. That would be bonkers. You're just deflecting, again.
I'm just observing the phenomenon you've just described in this thread. The context is on point. It was your point!
ControlsFreak
3d ago
This phenomenon isn't unique to Joo-haters. We just got to the point of you disagreeing with yourself. I don't know if we've gotten an elliptical theory, but we've definitely had cobbled together bits of apocrypha. I think we're at the "upper lip curl, go silent" stage, but I have to imagine that when it comes up again (and it will), you'll probably be repeating the same thing.
Oh man, approximately still gets me every time. I just write it, then when I got to paste it in, I see that it breaks, then I consider whether I want to spend a few minutes re-figuring-out what I want to do. I've given up in some comments not too long ago; pretty sure I just wrote "\approx", not caring. I'll be saving @ToaKraka's comment, and hopefully I remember I have it the next time it happens.
And indeed, at the time I came up with this way of thinking about it (I'd say about a decade ago), I was thinking about the debate on mpg/gpXm. I almost mentioned that here, because, yeah, a lot of people think in terms of having a fixed number of miles they're traveling, but don't intuitively grok 1/x relations. This speeding analysis is at least linear in distance, but it still has a 1/x relation, in a way. Yes, it's actually 1/x^2, but I guess what I'm kinda thinking is that one can lean on the 60min/1hr conversion, you have (d/r)*(60/r), and almost do it in two stages in your mind. If your nominal speed is 70, then you still have a d/r relation, but it's slightly modified by a 60/70, and I at least have a bit of an intuition as to how far off that's going to make my approximation, rather than having to just brute calculate the whole thing, actually thinking about the squared term.
ControlsFreak
6d ago
You were banned for an uncharitable bad faith post.
I notice a distinct lack of links this time in your false history. Let's go to the tape, where you said:
But fine, you can bring a reverse argument to the table if presented civilly, albeit somewhat disingenuously.
Are you saying that you lied then, when you said it was "fine"... or are you lying now, when you're saying that it was not fine and was the reason why I was banned.
For completeness, the reason you gave for why I was banned was:
However, you've then gone on to argue with people throughout this thread is a condescending and belligerent manner. The queue is filled with reports on your posts. No one post is terrible, but most of them are obnoxious and unnecessarily antagonistic.
I could repeat the rest of the history after that, but we've already done that. The entire premise of your current position is just factually false.
You demanded that I point specifically to the other posts that were bad.
I asked for one specific thing to support your claim.
I declined, because I wasn't going to argue with you about each post in the thread.
I asked for one specific thing to support your claim.
You claimed this was unfair.
I did not claim this.
You still think this is unfair.
I don't even necessarily think this. I'm not sure "fair" has anything to do with it.
Your claim that the mods "Use secret reasons they won't tell you about to ban people they don't like" is false.
I didn't actually claim this.
ControlsFreak
6d ago
That's a different problem, though. That's part of the awful adversarial game they play. But that doesn't change the fact that they have negotiated prices, and they both had a say in what those prices are. They (either one) can still just tell you the negotiated price, even if there may still be a fight over whether the insurance is actually going to pay. One problem at a time. Don't let the existence of the harder problem stop you from making the trivial solution to the easier problem. Nothing about this trivial solution to the easier problem makes the harder problem any harder.
ControlsFreak
6d ago
Oof, yes. Fixed.
You could easily just stop the problem and provide satisfaction. Just resolve the contradiction you created. This is not "my version" of anything. You literally just contradicted yourself! You said that you were wrong! We can just go look at your words and compare them to each other! You tried going silent as soon as this was pointed out, because you know it's true. And I'm guilty of always wanting to futilely talk down the crazy people to see if I can help them resolve obvious contradictions in their thinking.
More options
Context Copy link