Be careful what you wish for.

[Res Ipsa]

Ok, if that’s true, then my example is not different than yours.

I accept that. Yes. Fair. I bow my head and say, "defeated."

LOL. No head bowing required. Or even welcome. If we don’t allow each other to modify positions, what’s the point?

Going from where I think we agree, would you then agree that calling someone a pissboy violates Spirit Paradise Rule 2?

[canpakes]

Of course they don’t. Cultellus is not here to have an actual conversation about anything. Cultellus came here only to troll.

There’s no seriousness in any claim otherwise. The bit about ‘standing up for ajax’ was an after the fact excuse that took Cultellus over 300 posts to come up with.

By the way, has Cultellus backed up that bogus claim about doxxing, yet? ; )

I get the impression that they're afraid of Doc Cam and throwing everything at the wall to see it something'll stick. I dunno about anyone else, but I require empirical evidence for al dente.

It’s all BS. I respect RI’s efforts to try to get Cultellus to commit to anything in the spirit of an actual conversation, but as I’ve pointed out before, this routine of Cultellus’s was exposed way back on page 64 of your V&T thread.

If the premise of his claim is ignored (and it has to be given how selective he is in his ‘complaint’), then Cultellus will just drop it and pick up on the next thing that they believe will engage RI.

This is pretty straightforward trolling behavior. Nothing new with it.

[Res Ipsa]

Maybe if you’d be willing to summarize where you think we agree we could use that as a foundation to explore what else we agree on.

Maybe. I may be willing. Yes. I may be. I do not see the point, but yes. I may be.

I am assuming based on how this has gone for hundreds of posts (most to all of mine deleted) that you are not willing to do the same. Or, am I wrong?

Nope. Just a busy day and too much time here already. I thought maybe since you’ve noted several points of agreement, it would be quicker and easier for you than me. If I get the time, I may do it myself.

[Jersey Girl]

Here's a good guess. They think that Doc Cam is the nuclear weapon around here. Little do they know they started walking through a mine field from the beginning. I suppose we could provide them with a map so they know where the ED's are buried.

Nah.

I am the one that knocked, not Doc Cam.

Doc Cam is a needling, petulant bigot. He is not a weapon. He is a nuisance.

Newsflash. Doc Cam already responded to Shades proposals on this very thread. You would know that if only you bothered to read anything around here. Then again, if you bothered to read or acknowledge anything, you'd have to drop your hysterical ravings and then where would you be, huh?

Let me know when he generates 70+ pages of BS, starts deleting his posts to hide the evidence, then I'll get back to you on the nuisance part, k?

[Jersey Girl]

I get the impression that they're afraid of Doc Cam and throwing everything at the wall to see it something'll stick. I dunno about anyone else, but I require empirical evidence for al dente.

It’s all BS. I respect RI’s efforts to try to get Cultellus to commit to anything in the spirit of an actual conversation, but as I’ve pointed out before, this routine of Cultellus’s was exposed way back on page 64 of your V&T thread.

If the premise of his claim is ignored (and it has to be given how selective he is in his ‘complaint’), then Cultellus will just drop it and pick up on the next thing that they believe will engage RI.

This is pretty straightforward trolling behavior. Nothing new with it.

It isn't important whether or not RI gets Cult to commit to anything.

[Res Ipsa]

I get the impression that they're afraid of Doc Cam and throwing everything at the wall to see it something'll stick. I dunno about anyone else, but I require empirical evidence for al dente.

Posts like this do not hurt you, you already lost all credibility. However, if you had credibility and posted something like this, it would have eliminated whatever was left. Ask the counselor why that is the case. What happens when you ask a question out loud and on the record, without already knowing the answer?

It’s dangerous tactic in a trial, if the answer matters. But trial lawyers also ask questions where the answer doesn’t matter — they just want the jury to think about the question.

In this case, Jersey Girl is clearly trolling you. So your answer doesn’t matter. So, no effect on credibility at all. Context is everything. Credibility is a subjective evaluation. I’ve interacted with Jersey Girl for years. I find her highly credible. I also can usually tell when she’s joking, when she’s trolling, and when she’s serious. When you accuse Jersey Girl of having no credibility, you have no clue how absurd you sound.

Credibility is something earned — something built up over time. You haven’t been building. You’ve been self sabotaging. You could turn that around, but you’ve got to make at least some effort.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

You haven’t been building. You’ve been self sabotaging. You could turn that around, but you’ve got to make at least some effort.

There’s only one thing Doc “pissboy” Seismic is interested in doing:



And it’s cAuSiNg EaRtHqUaKeS!

- Doc

[Res Ipsa]

Going from where I think we agree, would you then agree that calling someone a pissboy violates Spirit Paradise Rule 2?

2. No blatant or otherwise obvious personal attacks allowed. This includes personal attacks against a person's family members.

Yes.

Arm to the square, yes.

many many many comments reserved. I can, nevertheless, give you a "yes."

Now I brace myself to see what the hell you do with that. Frankly, I do not trust you but this could be a worthwhile experiment.

LOL. Nobody trusts lawyers. I got over that years ago. But I sincerely appreciate the leap of faith.

So, are we agreed that the many posts in which you have called someone pissboy are in violation in Spirit Paradise Rule 2?

[Jersey Girl]

Posts like this do not hurt you, you already lost all credibility. However, if you had credibility and posted something like this, it would have eliminated whatever was left. Ask the counselor why that is the case. What happens when you ask a question out loud and on the record, without already knowing the answer?

It’s dangerous tactic in a trial, if the answer matters. But trial lawyers also ask questions where the answer doesn’t matter — they just want the jury to think about the question.

In this case, Jersey Girl is clearly trolling you. So your answer doesn’t matter. So, no effect on credibility at all. Context is everything. Credibility is a subjective evaluation. I’ve interacted with Jersey Girl for years. I find her highly credible. I also can usually tell when she’s joking, when she’s trolling, and when she’s serious. When you accuse Jersey Girl of having no credibility, you have no clue how absurd you sound.

Credibility is something earned — something built up over time. You haven’t been building. You’ve been self sabotaging. You could turn that around, but you’ve got to make at least some effort.

Blame the Italians.

[Jersey Girl]

It’s all BS. I respect RI’s efforts to try to get Cultellus to commit to anything in the spirit of an actual conversation, but as I’ve pointed out before, this routine of Cultellus’s was exposed way back on page 64 of your V&T thread.

If the premise of his claim is ignored (and it has to be given how selective he is in his ‘complaint’), then Cultellus will just drop it and pick up on the next thing that they believe will engage RI.

This is pretty straightforward trolling behavior. Nothing new with it.

Shut up, pissboy. You say stupid crap all the time and you are wrong.

I'll thank you to keep your urophilia out of my sight. Put it in Prison where it belongs.