|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 0:42:24 GMT
Yo, who the fuck do you think you are? I don't owe you anything, and I've already swatted away your stupid claims like a fly. If you want to know how I feel, go back and reread the thread. If you need someone to share your confusion with, go talk to your priest or your shrink or someone other than me. Stop taking out your incel aggression at me over what was never even a controversial statement to begin with. It was MANIFESTLY more risky to make Star Wars in '77 than TLJ a year ago, you absolute CLOWN. (And Disney still managed to piss off half of the people who saw it.) I don't have to "prove" that anymore than Newton had to "prove" or contextualize the quote to which I referred. You either understand it or you don't. Writing some pissy novella about your misunderstanding of what I'm saying doesn't mean I owe an equally long essay explaining what I've patiently explained -- what? Four, five, six times? Honestly, piss off. If you want to thump your chest like a gorilla, call me a troll, pretend like you've done anything here other than blather and waste everyone else's time, go for it, sparky. Meltdown time folks. ESL time, folks.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Feb 14, 2018 1:11:01 GMT
Hey, I'm the one extending the olive branch here. I'm asking you to repost your (supposed) proof so I can address it (again). You started hurling insults my way after I took the time to write you a detailed post trying to address your point and explain my side. And now you're pissed at me calling you a troll? If you don't want to be called a troll then don't act like one. I'm willing to start from square one: Post your point (properly backed up) and I'll readdress it. Yo, who the fuck do you think you are? I don't owe you anything, and I've already swatted away your stupid claims like a fly. If you want to know how I feel, go back and reread the thread. If you need someone to share your confusion with, go talk to your priest or your shrink or someone other than me. Stop taking out your incel aggression at me over what was never even a controversial statement to begin with. It was MANIFESTLY more risky to make Star Wars in '77 than TLJ a year ago, you absolute CLOWN. (And Disney still managed to piss off half of the people who saw it.) I don't have to "prove" that anymore than Newton had to "prove" or contextualize the quote to which I referred. You either understand it or you don't. Writing some pissy novella about your misunderstanding of what I'm saying doesn't mean I owe an equally long essay explaining what I've patiently explained -- what? Four, five, six times? Honestly, piss off. If you want to thump your chest like a gorilla, call me a troll, pretend like you've done anything here other than blather and waste everyone else's time, go for it, sparky. Wow, seems like I struck a nerve somewhere. Well, I won't rub your face in it so I'll jump right ahead to the discussion at hand: I read through your posts, and all I can see is you repeating your opinion. No providing of facts, no "backing up" as you claimed. Your analogy is also flawed. TLJ is part of the same Star Wars franchise whereas Ironman is in a completely different farnchise from Superman. I'd also like to repeat that Superman (1978) was not the first superhero movie, which again negates your premise.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 1:31:53 GMT
Yo, who the fuck do you think you are? I don't owe you anything, and I've already swatted away your stupid claims like a fly. If you want to know how I feel, go back and reread the thread. If you need someone to share your confusion with, go talk to your priest or your shrink or someone other than me. Stop taking out your incel aggression at me over what was never even a controversial statement to begin with. It was MANIFESTLY more risky to make Star Wars in '77 than TLJ a year ago, you absolute CLOWN. (And Disney still managed to piss off half of the people who saw it.) I don't have to "prove" that anymore than Newton had to "prove" or contextualize the quote to which I referred. You either understand it or you don't. Writing some pissy novella about your misunderstanding of what I'm saying doesn't mean I owe an equally long essay explaining what I've patiently explained -- what? Four, five, six times? Honestly, piss off. If you want to thump your chest like a gorilla, call me a troll, pretend like you've done anything here other than blather and waste everyone else's time, go for it, sparky. Wow, seems like I struck a nerve somewhere. Well, I won't rub your face in it so I'll jump right ahead to the discussion at hand: I read through your posts, and all I can see is you repeating your opinion. No providing of facts, no "backing up" as you claimed. Your analogy is also flawed. TLJ is part of the same Star Wars franchise whereas Ironman is in a completely different farnchise from Superman. I'd also like to repeat that Superman (1978) was not the first superhero movie, which again negates your premise.Never said it was. But, then, you don't understand my premise, since you don't understand the quote on which it's predicated, making the 5,382,834 words you've expended on this discursive Vietnam all for nought and void.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Feb 14, 2018 3:04:39 GMT
Wow, seems like I struck a nerve somewhere. Well, I won't rub your face in it so I'll jump right ahead to the discussion at hand: I read through your posts, and all I can see is you repeating your opinion. No providing of facts, no "backing up" as you claimed. Your analogy is also flawed. TLJ is part of the same Star Wars franchise whereas Ironman is in a completely different farnchise from Superman. I'd also like to repeat that Superman (1978) was not the first superhero movie, which again negates your premise.Never said it was. But, then, you don't understand my premise, since you don't understand the quote on which it's predicated, making the 5,382,834 words you've expended on this discursive Vietnam all for nought and void. Then explain it to me properly instead of just automatically hurling insults. You just compared the first Star Wars movie with Superman after all, you can understand why I'd be left with that conclusion. Forget the quotes, as I probably grew up with a different background than you did so not all quotes will be understood the same. Don't word play and just explain your point thoroughly. You know, the way adults discuss matters.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 3:25:17 GMT
Skaathar: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants[ The metaphor of dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants (Latin: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes) expresses the meaning of "discovering truth by building on previous discoveries".[1] This concept has been traced to the 12th century, attributed to Bernard of Chartres. Its most familiar expression in English is by Isaac Newton in 1675: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."[2]
The attribution to Bernard of Chartres is due to John of Salisbury. In 1159, John wrote in his Metalogicon: "Bernard of Chartres used to compare us to dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants. He pointed out that we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature."Edit: sigh: MCU = dwarf; other movies (I know, god forbid you acknowledge literally any movies existed before 2008) = giant. Derp. I feel like Silent Bob:
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Feb 14, 2018 4:34:46 GMT
Skaathar : en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants[ The metaphor of dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants (Latin: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes) expresses the meaning of "discovering truth by building on previous discoveries".[1] This concept has been traced to the 12th century, attributed to Bernard of Chartres. Its most familiar expression in English is by Isaac Newton in 1675: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."[2]
The attribution to Bernard of Chartres is due to John of Salisbury. In 1159, John wrote in his Metalogicon: "Bernard of Chartres used to compare us to dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants. He pointed out that we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature."Edit: sigh: MCU = dwarf; other movies (I know, god forbid you acknowledge literally any movies existed before 2008) = giant. Derp. I feel like Silent Bob: I didn't ask you to explain the quote, I asked you to explain your stance on the matter being discussed, mainly risk. The original issue we were discussing was whether the MCU took more risks than other studios. I said they did, you disagreed. Explain to me how this supports your stance that the MCU didn't take more risks as compared to other studios... because I don't see anything listed here to support that stance. So you think movies like Superman IV, Elektra, Ghost Rider, Catwoman etc. are giants?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 4:52:12 GMT
Skaathar : en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants[ The metaphor of dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants (Latin: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes) expresses the meaning of "discovering truth by building on previous discoveries".[1] This concept has been traced to the 12th century, attributed to Bernard of Chartres. Its most familiar expression in English is by Isaac Newton in 1675: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."[2]
The attribution to Bernard of Chartres is due to John of Salisbury. In 1159, John wrote in his Metalogicon: "Bernard of Chartres used to compare us to dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants. He pointed out that we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature."Edit: sigh: MCU = dwarf; other movies (I know, god forbid you acknowledge literally any movies existed before 2008) = giant. Derp. I feel like Silent Bob: I didn't ask you to explain the quote, I asked you to explain your stance on the matter being discussed, mainly risk. The original issue we were discussing was whether the MCU took more risks than other studios. I said they did, you disagreed. Explain to me how this supports your stance that the MCU didn't take more risks as compared to other studios... because I don't see anything listed here to support that stance. So you think movies like Superman IV, Elektra, Ghost Rider, Catwoman etc. are giants? Wow. Do you have any intellectual pride?
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Feb 14, 2018 19:41:35 GMT
I didn't ask you to explain the quote, I asked you to explain your stance on the matter being discussed, mainly risk. The original issue we were discussing was whether the MCU took more risks than other studios. I said they did, you disagreed. Explain to me how this supports your stance that the MCU didn't take more risks as compared to other studios... because I don't see anything listed here to support that stance. So you think movies like Superman IV, Elektra, Ghost Rider, Catwoman etc. are giants? Wow. Do you have any intellectual pride? I see you're back to your backhanded insults again. Are you even interested in having a decent conversation or do you just want to bicker like highschool kids? You didn't even bother addressing my main point. Could it be that you're dodging me again?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 19:48:54 GMT
Wow. Do you have any intellectual pride? I see you're back to your backhanded insults again. Are you even interested in having a decent conversation or do you just want to have a pissing contest? I'm not interested in having what you seem to consider "having a decent conversation," which seems to consist of you taking viewpoints that are disingenuous at best and flat-out stupid at worst. I have no interest in discussing this or anything else further with you at any time in the future. I've made my case. You've... posted a whole bunch of nonsense that basically indicates you're either uneducated or malicious, so -- yeah. I stand by my statement and the quote on which it was predicated. It wasn't even supposed to be a controversial statement or grounds for "discussion." Sorry your exposure to Western civilization is so meager, so limited, and so myopic as to fail to understand the simple point I've made a dozen or so times even after I copied and pasted its explicit meaning for you and literally explained to it to you like you were five years old. You can go back and reread what I've written, as I've already said, if you want to relitigate this non-issue in your own little mind. That's on you.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Feb 14, 2018 20:02:31 GMT
I see you're back to your backhanded insults again. Are you even interested in having a decent conversation or do you just want to have a pissing contest? I'm not interested in having what you seem to consider "having a decent conversation," which seems to consist of you taking viewpoints that are disingenuous at best and flat-out stupid at worst. I have no interest in discussing this or anything else further with you at any time in the future. I've made my case. You've... posted a whole bunch of nonsense that basically indicates you're either uneducated or malicious, so -- yeah. I stand by my statement and the quote on which it was predicated. It wasn't even supposed to be a controversial statement or grounds for "discussion." Sorry your exposure to Western civilization is so meager, so limited, and so myopic as to fail to understand the simple point I've made a dozen or so times even after I copied and pasted its explicit meaning for you and literally explained to it to you like you were five years old. You can go back and reread what I've written, as I've already said, if you want to relitigate this non-issue in your own little mind. That's on you. In other words, you realized that you are unable to refute my arguments, have no valid counter-arguments to my statement. So you spam me with insults, using it as a cover to run away and avoid engaging in a proper debate that you know you can't stand up to. Like I said: Classic.Troll.Behavior.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 20:05:29 GMT
I'm not interested in having what you seem to consider "having a decent conversation," which seems to consist of you taking viewpoints that are disingenuous at best and flat-out stupid at worst. I have no interest in discussing this or anything else further with you at any time in the future. I've made my case. You've... posted a whole bunch of nonsense that basically indicates you're either uneducated or malicious, so -- yeah. I stand by my statement and the quote on which it was predicated. It wasn't even supposed to be a controversial statement or grounds for "discussion." Sorry your exposure to Western civilization is so meager, so limited, and so myopic as to fail to understand the simple point I've made a dozen or so times even after I copied and pasted its explicit meaning for you and literally explained to it to you like you were five years old. You can go back and reread what I've written, as I've already said, if you want to relitigate this non-issue in your own little mind. That's on you. In other words, you realized that you are unable to refute my arguments, have no valid counter-arguments to my statement. So you spam me with insults, using it as a cover to run away and avoid engaging in a proper debate that you know you can't stand up to. Like I said: Classic.Troll.Behavior. In other words: I don't like you, think you're a fucking moron, already refuted your stupid arguments, and have better things to do with my time than go around and around and around in circles while you bloviate. I mean, how small is your dick, bro, that you can't accept that you're wrong? Get over it. This is embarrassing.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 14, 2018 20:09:14 GMT
In other words, you realized that you are unable to refute my arguments, have no valid counter-arguments to my statement. So you spam me with insults, using it as a cover to run away and avoid engaging in a proper debate that you know you can't stand up to. Like I said: Classic.Troll.Behavior. In other words: I don't like you, think you're a fucking moron, already refuted your stupid arguments, So you're having your skin-failure induced meltdown, and you can't refute his arguments.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Feb 14, 2018 20:13:19 GMT
In other words, you realized that you are unable to refute my arguments, have no valid counter-arguments to my statement. So you spam me with insults, using it as a cover to run away and avoid engaging in a proper debate that you know you can't stand up to. Like I said: Classic.Troll.Behavior. In other words: I don't like you, think you're a fucking moron, already refuted your stupid arguments, and have better things to do with my time than go around and around and around in circles while you bloviate. I mean, how small is your dick, bro, that you can't accept that you're wrong? Get over it. This is embarrassing. Oh but you never refuted my arguments. Not once. What you did was call me a moron, a pompous windbag, question my IQ, ridiculed me for not knowing Western culture like you do, called my arguments stupid, insulted my dick size (yup, definitely showed your maturity there), etc. But not once did you even address the numbers I gave you that showed how the MCU had a bigger financial risk than DC nor that they were a clear underdog in brandname recognition or how your so-called "giants" weren't really giants at all. I've changed my mind, you're not a troll after all. What you are is a kid who's used to bullying others, and the first time someone actually stands up to you with a logical, well thought-out argument you throw a tantrum and run away. If you can't stand the heat, don't start a fire.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 20:18:45 GMT
In other words: I don't like you, think you're a fucking moron, already refuted your stupid arguments, and have better things to do with my time than go around and around and around in circles while you bloviate. I mean, how small is your dick, bro, that you can't accept that you're wrong? Get over it. This is embarrassing. Oh but you never refuted my arguments. Not once. What you did was call me a moron, a pompous windbag, question my IQ, ridiculed me for not knowing Western culture like you do, called my arguments stupid, etc. But not once did you even address the numbers I gave you that showed how the MCU had a bigger financial risk than DC nor that they were a clear underdog in brandname recognition. So even though I didn't buy into your false and arbitrary framing of the argument/issue I'm supposed to go in great detail about it? I don't agree with your premise, and you don't seem to understand mine. I don't owe you some sentence-by-sentence trench warfare response to what was a loquacious and silly argument, which I've told you repeatedly. Blow me.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 20:20:16 GMT
In other words: I don't like you, think you're a fucking moron, already refuted your stupid arguments, So you're having your skin-failure induced meltdown, and you can't refute his arguments. No, his "arguments" are completely beside the point that I made, which is irrefutable if you understand it in the first place. I wouldn't expect you to do so, because that you're a non-native English speaker and it requires a bit of nuance.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 20:22:31 GMT
I've changed my mind, you're not a troll after all. What you are is a kid who's used to bullying others, and the first time someone actually stands up to you with a logical, well thought-out argument you throw a tantrum and run away. If you can't stand the heat, don't start a fire. And if you don't understand what someone else is talking about, maybe jumping in at all is inadvisable going forward. You know? Your macho posturing reeks of someone who hasn't been laid in a minute, dude.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Feb 14, 2018 20:24:38 GMT
Oh but you never refuted my arguments. Not once. What you did was call me a moron, a pompous windbag, question my IQ, ridiculed me for not knowing Western culture like you do, called my arguments stupid, etc. But not once did you even address the numbers I gave you that showed how the MCU had a bigger financial risk than DC nor that they were a clear underdog in brandname recognition. So even though I didn't buy into your false and arbitrary framing of the argument/issue I'm supposed to go in great detail about it? I don't agree with your premise, and you don't seem to understand mine. I don't owe you some sentence-by-sentence trench warfare response to what was a loquacious and silly argument, which I've told you repeatedly. Blow me. You've continuously told me to fuck, even mentioned my dick, and now you want me to blow you? I guess it's obvious who here hasn't been laid recently. Anyway, sorry but you're not my type. As for your arguments, you can make excuses all you want. End of the day, the fact that you resorted to name-calling and insults without aggravation tells me that you got out-debated and you were a sore-loser about it. Because if it's true and all we had was a misunderstanding, then you wouldn't be throwing such a tantrum.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 14, 2018 20:25:47 GMT
So you're having your skin-failure induced meltdown, and you can't refute his arguments. No, his "arguments" are Completely sound.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 20:32:14 GMT
So even though I didn't buy into your false and arbitrary framing of the argument/issue I'm supposed to go in great detail about it? I don't agree with your premise, and you don't seem to understand mine. I don't owe you some sentence-by-sentence trench warfare response to what was a loquacious and silly argument, which I've told you repeatedly. Blow me. You've continuously told me to fuck, even mentioned my dick, and now you want me to blow you? Sorry but you're not my type. As for your arguments, you can make excuses all you want. End of the day, the fact that you resorted to name-calling and insults without aggravation tells me that you got out-debated and you were a sore-loser about it. Because if it's true and all we had was a misunderstanding, then you wouldn't be throwing such a tantrum. I love how it's a "tantrum" because I used expletives. Sorry to offend you and formersamhmd . I didn't realize you ladies were so delicate as to find "coarse language," which is just how I talk, such an affront as to leave you with a gloved hand over your mouth. We didn't have a misunderstanding. You did. You don't understand what I meant in the first place, went off on a tangent, and then got mad when I (a) told you that your tangent didn't change -- or even address, though you thought it did -- my stance, (b) then explained it to you anyway, and you (c) still didn't understand. You're... not a bright guy, from all indications. I've told you that politely, I've told you that impolitely, and you seem to not be able to let it go. Are you okay? Seriously. Is something going on in your life that's leading you to hang onto this like a dog on a bumper? I don't care about this. I don't care if you jump in front of a fucking truck in lieu of responding to my latest response. This is all nonsense, and I'm typing it while not even looking at the screen and watching television because I can't be bothered to even reread it.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Feb 14, 2018 20:33:42 GMT
wrong. See how stupid this is? What's even the point of this? You should lose this from your repertoire. It's dumb. Stick to your ESL checklist.
|
|