News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Assange: Collaborators Deserve To Die

Started by jimmy olsen, May 28, 2011, 12:22:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

grumbler

Quote from: Viking on May 28, 2011, 05:39:29 AM
Quote from: grumbler on May 28, 2011, 05:29:55 AM
Quote from: dps on May 28, 2011, 03:17:16 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 28, 2011, 02:44:11 AM
I think it's principled to want to clean the world from deficients like Tim.

Yeah, if your principles are the same as those of the Nazis.
Ten posts before Marti wins the debate via Godwin's Law.  Nice going, Languish.

Thats not godwins law.

Godwins law is
"As an online discussion grows longer the probability that somebody compares someone to the Nazis approaches 1."

the idea that the first person to mention hitler loses is just a tradition. If you are going to be a pedantic shit, at least do us the courtesy of not getting your pedantic asshattery wrong.
Actually, of you are going to be a pedantic little shit while moaning that others are being pedantic, at least get your facts straight so that you don't look like an ignorant pedantic!  :lol:

Godwin's Law, according to Godwin, is "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. " (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.10/godwin.if.html)   Don't misquote him if you are going to whine about others getting things wrong!  :rolleyes:

As for my note that Marti wins the thread, it isn't something that I made up.  The Daily Telegraph noted that "As well as the descriptive form, it can be used prescriptively: so if any poster does mention the Nazis in a discussion thread, Godwin's Law can be invoked, they instantly lose the argument and the thread can be ended." (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/6408927/Internet-rules-and-laws-the-top-10-from-Godwin-to-Poe.html)

In fact, this implication of Godwin's Law resulted in the formulation of Quirk's Exception: "Intentional invocation of this so-called "Nazi Clause" is ineffectual." (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Quirk%27s%20Exception)

So, the clever person faced with a Godwin's Law invocation doesn't burst into tears and start lashing out with accusations of "pedantic shit," he or she merely says "Quirk's Exception" and we all laugh.

Not that you necessarily care what a clever person would do.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Neil

Manning should be shot.  Assange should be hanged.  Martinus should be beaten.  Tim's not so bad.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Neil

Godwin's Law has been repeatedly debunked, as often debate continues and threads almost never end at that point.  It simply doesn't mesh with the evidence, and so can't be considered scientific.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Slargos

Go easy on him.

When you get to be grumbler's age, learning new things can be difficult.

grumbler

Quote from: Neil on May 28, 2011, 06:52:21 AM
Godwin's Law has been repeatedly debunked, as often debate continues and threads almost never end at that point.  It simply doesn't mesh with the evidence, and so can't be considered scientific.
Duh!  :lol:
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Slargos

Grumbler's law: The probability that a thread derails on a meaningless technicality approaches 1 after grumbler makes his first post in it.

grumbler

Quote from: Slargos on May 28, 2011, 07:17:13 AM
Grumbler's law: The probability that a Languish thread derails on a meaningless technicality approaches 1.
Fixed.  I don't bring up these meaningless technicalities, you will note (Marti posts excepted).
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Neil

Quote from: grumbler on May 28, 2011, 07:14:07 AM
Quote from: Neil on May 28, 2011, 06:52:21 AM
Godwin's Law has been repeatedly debunked, as often debate continues and threads almost never end at that point.  It simply doesn't mesh with the evidence, and so can't be considered scientific.
Duh!  :lol:
Then why bring it up?
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Slargos

Quote from: grumbler on May 28, 2011, 07:42:06 AM
Quote from: Slargos on May 28, 2011, 07:17:13 AM
Grumbler's law: The probability that a Languish thread derails on a meaningless technicality approaches 1.
Fixed.  I don't bring up these meaningless technicalities, you will note (Marti posts excepted).

Of course not. All the technicalities you bring up are without question terribly importante.  :lol:

Oh no, did you note my misspelling there? Let's discuss it for 10 pages.

Martinus

I think Manning is a hero, a modern day Dreyfuss or something. So fuck you all.

Neil

Quote from: Martinus on May 28, 2011, 08:24:39 AM
I think Manning is a hero, a modern day Dreyfuss or something. So fuck you all.
Except Dreyfuss didn't commit the crime he was accused of.  Manning sold his country out for faggotry.  So really, you're just insulting Dreyfuss with the comparison.  Which isn't that surprising, given your attitude towards Jews.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

CountDeMoney

Quote from: Martinus on May 28, 2011, 08:24:39 AM
I think Manning is a hero, a modern day Dreyfuss or something. So fuck you all.

Nice attempted piroutte out of your anti-Semitism with the Jewfuss reference, but if Manning were a heterophobe you wouldn't even be posting about this.

grumbler

Quote from: Neil on May 28, 2011, 07:55:07 AM
Then why bring it up?
Because it is amusing.  Why mention my bringing it up?  Or, if mentioning it, why not mention it properly, by citing Quirk's Exception?
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

grumbler

Quote from: Slargos on May 28, 2011, 08:08:30 AM
Of course not. All the technicalities you bring up are without question terribly importante.  :lol:
Since I don't bring up technicalities, you must have me confused with someone else.  :lol:

QuoteOh no, did you note my misspelling there? Let's discuss it for 10 pages.
I'll leave that to you.  Internet discussions about spelling errors bore me.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

CountDeMoney

Quote from: grumbler on May 28, 2011, 08:39:15 AM
Quote from: Slargos on May 28, 2011, 08:08:30 AM
QuoteOh no, did you note my misspelling there? Let's discuss it for 10 pages.
I'll leave that to you.  Internet discussions about spelling errors bore me.

I'll field that one.