I'm so bored wth you.

[eumaas]

oi mate tahts teh pisstake!11

[Dr. Medulla]

I've made this point before to derision, but oddly no one will find contradictory evidence: I do not post non-sequiturs.

If all logic is relative and internal, yours is a true statement.

Give me the post I've made and the preceding posts and I will be able to explain it.

12 February 2005, fifth post of the day.

Nice reading comprehension, slick.

You were just talking about today? I thought it was a larger historical statement. Harder for me to be a smartass when you limit my mobility, sparky.

[Wolter]

Give me the post I've made and the preceding posts and I will be able to explain it.

12 February 2005, fifth post of the day.

Nice reading comprehension, slick.

Conveniently for you, IMCT went into a reboot recently and the years of data on your posting habits were lost. I will assume that your posting habits are the reason kittens cry and puppies feel pain.

To clarify, I'm the non sequitur guy. I never implicated Wolter, though his rage is appreciated. I like to bring out the non sequitur to insert onto heated debates and flame-wars when they get out of control as a means of pointing out the absurity of such escapades.

Oddly, your use of Non Sequitur made perfect sense to me in context.

[Wolter]

If all logic is relative and internal, yours is a true statement.

Give me the post I've made and the preceding posts and I will be able to explain it.

12 February 2005, fifth post of the day.

Nice reading comprehension, slick.

You were just talking about today? I thought it was a larger historical statement. Harder for me to be a smartass when you limit my mobility, sparky.

No, it was rather implicit that you provide a specific post (not a location of a post) and the preceding posts that led up to it, chief.

[Dr. Medulla]

Give me the post I've made and the preceding posts and I will be able to explain it.

12 February 2005, fifth post of the day.

Nice reading comprehension, slick.

You were just talking about today? I thought it was a larger historical statement. Harder for me to be a smartass when you limit my mobility, sparky.

No, it was rather implicit that you provide a specific post (not a location of a post) and the preceding posts that led up to it, chief.

Like I know the contents of your fifth post on 12 February 2005. I gave you the cite—that's good enough for you to look up. Um, bucko.

[Wolter]

12 February 2005, fifth post of the day.

Nice reading comprehension, slick.

You were just talking about today? I thought it was a larger historical statement. Harder for me to be a smartass when you limit my mobility, sparky.

No, it was rather implicit that you provide a specific post (not a location of a post) and the preceding posts that led up to it, chief.

Like I know the contents of your fifth post on 12 February 2005. I gave you the cite—that's good enough for you to look up. Um, bucko.

Yeah, if you don't know the contents then you're using a cheap rhetorical trick that is not in the spirit of the question asked, sailor.

[Marky Dread]

Has anybody here heard about this group called The Clash?

[eumaas]

Has anybody here heard about this group called The Clash?

nope

[Wolter]

Has anybody here heard about this group called The Clash?

nope

You could probably start a thread about them.

[Wolter]

That's sort of the whole point, right? We don't (generally) create megathreads here where posts don't relate to each other. If a thread has gotten "off-topic" it's only because the conversation grew that way organically. People around here complain constantly about the internet culture (or whatever) and how disconnected from reality it is - and then demand that conversations stay on exactly one topic and don't deviate from that. Is that how conversations work in real life? No, it isn't and I like to think what makes these boards so great is that they're forums for naturally grown conversations, not rigidly controlled discussions about one topic. If people want something to stay "on topic" they should post about it, because I guarantee you that complaining about threads getting off topic in NO WAY has anything to do with any topic being discussed. Ever.

[Dr. Medulla]

Nice reading comprehension, slick.

You were just talking about today? I thought it was a larger historical statement. Harder for me to be a smartass when you limit my mobility, sparky.

No, it was rather implicit that you provide a specific post (not a location of a post) and the preceding posts that led up to it, chief.

Like I know the contents of your fifth post on 12 February 2005. I gave you the cite—that's good enough for you to look up. Um, bucko.

Yeah, if you don't know the contents then you're using a cheap rhetorical trick that is not in the spirit of the question asked, sailor.

If you're blackening the eye of centuries of academic tradition, which reveres the act of citation as part of the intellectual process, then you are worse than Benedict Arnold, Nero, and Gargamel combined. Cousin.

[wmhp2]

I do agree with flex about posts evolving etc... and really i wasnt complaining about that.
its just that EVERY FUCKIN THREAD gets hijacked by random crap.
why not just have a thread called 'i cant be arsed talking about your topic i wanna just talk shite'

[Marky Dread]

That's sort of the whole point, right? We don't (generally) create megathreads here where posts don't relate to each other. If a thread has gotten "off-topic" it's only because the conversation grew that way organically. People around here complain constantly about the internet culture (or whatever) and how disconnected from reality it is - and then demand that conversations stay on exactly one topic and don't deviate from that. Is that how conversations work in real life? No, it isn't and I like to think what makes these boards so great is that they're forums for naturally grown conversations, not rigidly controlled discussions about one topic. If people want something to stay "on topic" they should post about it, because I guarantee you that complaining about threads getting off topic in NO WAY has anything to do with any topic being discussed. Ever.

I'm scared of Big writing.

[Wolter]

I do agree with flex about posts evolving etc... and really i wasnt complaining about that.
its just that EVERY FUCKIN THREAD gets hijacked by random crap.
why not just have a thread called 'i cant be arsed talking about your topic i wanna just talk shite'

Because that thread would die after 3-4 posts. Threads need a germ of actual conversation to create drift. No one starts talking about nothing in person, either.

If you want the thread to stay on topic...POST A POST ON THE FUCKING TOPIC.

And Hooks, is it academic tradition to cite non-existent sources?

[Kory]

I like bunnies.