Amadeo wrote:Block wrote:- no. that's me at 4 in the morning laughing at trolling you stans.
Also, if a person 'knows' they're being trolled, yet still falls for it and gets angry, what exactly does that say about them and their character? (or lack thereof)
You can't know that someone is trolling and still fall for it. Taking someone's bait implies that you don't know it's bait. I didn't get angry.
![]()
I was referring to EminemInsider. I fully comprehend that it can be rather difficult to tell you both apart--even to you--, due to the pretentious, douchey attitude that you both hold so dearly; But try to keep up. And even though I was referring to him, you're still responding = you fell for the bait. Don't try to deny it or make excuses; You fell for it.
Block wrote:- I suppose when posting toward a group of try-hard, pseudo-elitists it becomes necessary to keep everything politically correct. I was referring to losing an argument on this forum. Not 10 years ago in grade school. I was under the impression that when I mentioned this forum, after mentioning not having lost an argument, it would become evident that I was speaking in terms of this particular forum; I guess not. Again, pseudo-intellect. You can type semi-neat, yet you lack any form of reasoning that isn't concrete and spelled out for you.
Okay, so you were saying you've never lost an argument on this forum. Well, that's a lie, isn't it? You lost at least 5000 times in this thread alone.
5,000 times, huh? Mind explaining how you arrived at this absurd number? Also, what exactly have I lost? How was I arguing in any way, other than absurd statements about Eminem's ghost writer? Surely a person cannot lose an argument based on their opinion? Fact has to come in to play somewhere, correct?Block wrote:- Holy shit. He missed a conjunction at 4 in the morning. HELP. Dumb ass.
The point was to expose you as a hypocrite. You call people out for "failing Elementary English" and make basic English errors yourself. Don't call people out on it next time.
The error which I mentioned was actually a reading comprehension error on his part. Therefore, your attempt to call me out on a misplaced (or missing) conjunction was made void by the fact it was out of context. You can't win.Block wrote:-sorry, I'm not a math nerd. I don't pride myself on knowing how to read math expressions. If you do, which it seems you do, lmaoo @ you. Although, I have a sneaking suspicion that I'm correct on the meaning.
But you have used math symbols on this forum before. Here's a post you made in the "Hopsin Disses Novi Novak" thread:Block wrote:warbux >>> Hopsin
So you bother to use math symbols but don't bother knowing what they mean?
=/= is a common way of writing the symbol "not equal to" on computers. I'll give you some examples of correct use of some math symbols:
Block =/= smart
Block = stupid
Amadeo > Block
EminemInsider > Block
Piece of shit > Block
I have never professed myself to be a math wiz. Nor have I said I know everything there is to know about the subject; Does that mean a person cannot know something about the subject? Obviously I know that > and < mean greater than and less than, respectively. Despite your attempted condescension, =/= is not a commonly used symbol outside of the math community / nerd community. Forgive me for not persuing mathematics and actually persuing a career worth mentioning. I mean, who would have thought? I'm sure you got one up on me with that one, bro. Everyone in the normal world will agree that your mathematic prowess is impressive... Not.
As such, if that symbol is supposed to mean 'not equal to', why would you even use it when quoting what I said, "duplicated and bitten"? Clearly the AND in the middle of 'duplicated' and 'bitten'
is separating the two; Making them two separate entities thriving on their own. Right? Now who looks foolish?Block wrote:- Again, refer to my question above. And I'm hardly going out of my way, considering I STARTED THE THREAD. I haven't posted in here half as much as you fucks.
Okay, let's do some more basic math here. I'll explain it in detail since you don't seem to be very good at math.
Before you wrote your post that I am currently responding to, you had written 13 posts in this thread (not including the OP). Before this post I am currently writing, I had written 5 posts in this thread.
Sorry, 13 isn't less than half of 5. In fact, I can say that I haven't posted in here half as much as you, because 5 is less than half of 13. Do you see how I worked that out, Einstein? Let's apply some of that math notation I taught you before (you probably forgot it by now after smacking your head into a wall):
5 < 1/2 * 13
13 > 5
I can clearly tell that another lesson in reading comprehension is needed. 'you fucks' is plural. See that 's' on the end of the word 'fuck'? that means more than one. That's indicative of the fact I'm referring to more than one person. I was referring to the chit-chat community and everyone attempting to argue against me. If you weren't such a self-absorbed fucktard, you'd have noticed that I made 'fucks' plural. Do I have to explain what the word 'plural' means, Amadeo?Block wrote:And a heads up: breaking down posts with little quotes is played as fuck on this forum. Don't you guys come up with your own system of debating? You all just follow one another with the same actions and movements.
Breaking down posts with little quotes is standard practice on forums, because it's user-friendly and allows users to know what it is you're responding to. For example, people reading this post know which section of your post I am responding to and are able to follow the discussion.
Your way of responding to people (with hyphens and misplaced quotes) is not standard practice for a reason: it's retarded. It's not immediately obvious which parts of my posts you're responding to (although it becomes obvious from the context).
And it's clear from the context that the guy meant "epidemic." In your attempt to embarrass him, you kind of embarrassed yourself with some bad reading comprehension there.
When responding to more than one person and being under time constraints, I'd rather not turn a post into a research project (which you obviously attempt to do) I mean, searching through my earlier posts? Counting posts in this thread? Pathetic? Lol. Your idiocy knows no bounds.
As far as him/her meaning 'epidemic' is concerned; Sorry, 'retard' is a foreign language to me. I tend to shy away from people who not only misconstrue the words they're attempting to use, but make up words in the process.


This is way too easy. I thought you fucks were supposed to be some of the best debaters this forum has to offer? Either you all fell off or I'm just that good.