|
flamebait resume advice (pg. 51)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
I didn't accuse you. What the are you talking about. |
Yes you did. :stongue: |
|
|
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
My moms a selfish bitch who only cares about how she would like me to be. |
And she's right. She wants you to be sane, and getting you treatment would be the only way. |
|
|
| Import |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
I didn't accuse you. What the are you talking about. |
Lets not play stupid now William
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
The error doesn't exist in my backups. I will pursue any hacking of the webpage atleast in reporting it. Just so you are aware it could involve criminal investigation. |
Let me guess thats vague enough that it wasn't a accusation (remember it's directly after quoting my message about the typos). |
|
|
| w_ashley |
| quote: | Originally posted by idoru
Yes you did. :stongue: |
Link.
If you think I was referencing you and only you, you are quite mistaken. It was a hypothetical context and if you interpreted it as me accusing you you are sadly mistaken. Is there a reason I should accuse you? |
|
|
| w_ashley |
| quote: | Originally posted by jennypie
No it doesn't, you ing moron. That's the SOLE reason for a form 1, 3, 42, whatever. Because INFORMED consent assumes that the person is both competent and capable of doing so. Think about what that means. |
I had no problems until they started drugging me. I was laying in a bed handcuffed until they started drugging me. How is that demonstrating an inability to make informed decisions. I understood what was going on. There is absolutely nothing indicating I didn't.
They bypassed me without cause. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Import
I thought this was clear when he accused me of hacking his website in order to add typos so that later I could correct them.
:conf: |
Pretty much, but that's an inability to admit general -ups, rather than admit the possibility he could be misinterpreted and it might be his fault. Besides, denying he had missed typos was consistent(ly insane) throughout, where as I got him to openly contradict himself from one post to the next
Most of his tales of persecution seem to involve malevolent doctors/border police/TA members deliberately twisting his words and actions against him to pursue spiteful and immoral vendettas. I was trying to show the crazy bastard that people aren't really twisting his actions, he's just coming across as nuts even on the occasions when he is just weird. |
|
|
| w_ashley |
There is that lack of bias again. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| And what is it you're doing? Lol. |
|
|
| FuzzQi |
| Ash you might find this interesting |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Link.
If you think I was referencing you and only you, you are quite mistaken. It was a hypothetical context and if you interpreted it as me accusing you you are sadly mistaken. Is there a reason I should accuse you? |
Who you specifically accused is not the point, you ing moron. It's the fact you accused anyone of hacking your website that proves you can't face up to your own -ups.
What's more, because Google caching shows the same typos, and I saw them within a day of this thread being posted, you're accusing someone of:
1. Deciding straight away to make you look a fool through inserting typos.
2. Theorising you made typos in the past before editing them out.
3. Went onto Google's cache of your site to find the specific errors (Why?) you'd made in the past.
4. Reinserted these precise errors but changing nothing else.
And again, you're proving my point that you cannot understand basic human ing communications. You completely miss the point of the post and start arguing about who you specifically accused of hacking, as if that's the issue at hand. Nobody sane does that. And you've done it over and over in all your threads. |
|
|
| w_ashley |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Who you specifically accused is not the point |
Actually it is since he just accused me of accusing him.
| quote: | | , you ing moron. It's the fact you accused anyone of hacking your website that proves you can't face up to your own -ups. |
The fact that "someone" could of did it given the fact my computer has been hacked in the past, is not at all unusual. The common occurence on this site of people attacking other people and deriding them does not indicate it is beyond the realm of possibility.
| quote: | | What's more, because Google caching shows the same typos, |
Caching that is at another period from the point of revision of the document. You should notice there are many other typos in the Feb. 2nd document. Somehow only this 1 error remained which should of easily been detected by the spell check. After someone stated there were errors and before pointing out the error I spell checked multiple times to determine that there indeed were no English language errors. This was done meticulously in MS Word. The only reason why I am so adamant in the fact is due to multiple spell checks which occurred just prior the error appearing. If this seems delusional to you then so be it. However this wouldn't be the first time my documents spelling has been altered. The period in question was over a month after that cache so except demonstrating typos were corrected between the two versions this does little else.
| quote: | and I saw them within a day of this thread being posted, you're accusing someone of:
1. Deciding straight away to make you look a fool through inserting typos.
2. Theorising you made typos in the past before editing them out.
3. Went onto Google's cache of your site to find the specific errors (Why?) you'd made in the past.
4. Reinserted these precise errors but changing nothing else.
|
Actually I think it happened this way.
There were typos - more than the single error.
They were corrected.
People persisted staying there were typos but there weren't.
I checked multiple times.
You then pointed out the E=mail thing - which I cannot confirm the second half of, since I have no recollection of the state of the Adress point in question. I did raise the possibility of a change such as occurred with one of the other pictures that appeared. That being that the state of the picture was altered. You may not have seen the picture alteration in question but was the fisrt of the two wolf pictures. There was text on the top of the first one identical to the second one. Later the text was removed.
| quote: | | And again, you're proving my point that you cannot understand basic human ing communications. You completely miss the point of the post and start arguing about who you specifically accused of hacking, as if that's the issue at hand. Nobody sane does that. And you've done it over and over in all your threads. |
It is one instance in question here. Although I have had indications of someone else having previously done this type of thing. I get all kinds of traffic from my router that is coming from the net. Although I can't say this is directly related. I would not be suprised that my IP was being used by anyone who has access to determine IP used from posting of graphics and links remotely hosted. I'm not saying this absolutely happened. I am saying I have more confidence in my faculty that the error did not exist after multiple spell checks of the document. While errors did exist and I can attest to that, they were corrected. I havn't checked but since I worked with teh Feb. 2nd document after Feb 2nd I know that there were more spelling errors in that document, and it should indicate atleast that some form of error correction occurred. Since you can't present evidence to the contrary this is a moot point. As explained before, you have no verifiable evidence from this end and vice versa.
If this doesn't sound like a sound mind to you, then you are simply a nut. |
|
|
|
|
