• Xenforo Cloud is upgrading us to version 2.3.8 on Monday February 16th, 2026 at 12:00 AM PST. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

2018 PotWR Round 4: Semi-Elimination Ballot

Sherdog PotWR Round 4: Semi-Elimination Ballot


  • Total voters
    327
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
tenor.gif

That show will never die to me. Was non-stop funny.
 
Thanks. Feel better? Maybe a nice glass of milk and an Oreo to simmer you down?

I don't recall seeing that in the POTWR thread. Why didn't you just answer where appropriate?



Principles came into it when I asked you about them and yours. But you haven't spoken on any so right now I just figure you have none. Not my job to read your mind. From a smart person who is not a condescending douche, I anticipate the discussion to involve the principles of free speech, free press, jurisdictional limits, and foreigner's obligation to follow US demands even though not on US soil.

Now look at your response and tell me where I'm supposed to be impressed? You just say what you want. You don't say what it's based on. It's than inability or unwillingness to drill down that prevents me from thinking you're anywhere near the top of the class around here.
See a couple posts above this.

You owe now.
 
Be honest. I have enough respect for you to know that you can tell that SBJJ is of below-average intelligence and a raging partisan and that Fawlty is in the top 1% here.
 
No, @Cubo de Sangre, I don't think that we should ignore what are likely crimes through some bizarre mechanism of abuse of principles.
 
See a couple posts above this.

You owe now.

Now are you allowed to elaborate? Just saying those words doesn't make you smart. Now explain them. Next time you talk over my head will be the first, so try stepping up, big boy.
 
"Drilling down" to you means endless questions like you're some kind of Bethesda fetch quest. Suck my Ecuadorian ball, and kiss my Cherokee one.

No, I mean providing something beyond rudimentary talking points. Comment on how free speech, press, and jurisdiction come into play. Just breathe and quit being too cool for school.
 
No, @Cubo de Sangre, I don't think that we should ignore what are likely crimes through some bizarre mechanism of abuse of principles.
Might as well toss in the NY times, the Wall Street Journal the Washington Post and any other publisher who has leaked classified information.

Fraud, might be punishable too for the direct in your face liars.

I like to see justice and the rule of law. Nothing pisses me off more than corruption and there is plenty to go around.
 
Now are you allowed to elaborate? Just saying those words doesn't make you smart. Now explain them. Next time you talk over my head will be the first, so try stepping up, big boy.
Now lick my black shaft.

You have to have the honesty to admit that I was implying the observance of 3 principles in those posts: The rule of law, due process, and protection of democracy.

Here's how it doesn't work (keep licking): "Dur hur I said what about principles, and even though you just explained how you were invoking 3 of them I'm gonna try to make it sound like you don't have principles by asking stupid questions about free press when he actually looks like a spy, free speech when he seems to be playing middleman for illegally obtained material, etc."
 
Now lick my black shaft.

You have to have the honesty to admit that I was implying the observance of 3 principles in those posts: The rule of law, due process, and protection of democracy.

Here's how it doesn't work (keep licking): "Dur hur I said what about principles, and even though you just explained how you were invoking 3 of them I'm gonna try to make it sound like you don't have principles by asking stupid questions about free press when he actually looks like a spy, free speech when he seems to be playing middleman for illegally obtained material, etc."
You WR guys play ball in strange ways, and not just you. I never could understand Cricket. I like to take pieces and make puzzles to see a bigger picture. If it doesn't hang, then I dismantle it and try again. Or not.

I still like watching cricket and enjoy it for a little while once every few years or so.
 
No, I mean providing something beyond rudimentary talking points. Comment on how free speech, press, and jurisdiction come into play. Just breathe and quit being too cool for school.

I'm struggling to understand what the point of disagreement or controversy is in this exchange. He said that, in reference to a question of whether Assange should be imprisoned, he should be if it is shown that he broke United States criminal laws, which it seemed to Fawlty that he did - but that he would need to see the charges and that those charges would need to be litigated. It's pretty much the same thing that Quipling and I said, right? That Assange should receive due process and not be summarily imprisoned, but that he shouldn't be given immunity to laws in place. So what's controversial about that?
 
Might as well toss in the NY times, the Wall Street Journal the Washington Post and any other publisher who has leaked classified information.

Fraud, might be punishable too for the direct in your face liars.

I like to see justice and the rule of law. Nothing pisses me off more than corruption and there is plenty to go around.
You definitely don't get to toss in the NYT et al, because if their primary purpose was simply being a hub on the black market network for classified and illegally-obtained info, and appeared to be doing it to help a hostile power and a presidential candidate collude to take over the country, and helping to coordinate the release of that info with them, they would have America's dick up their asses too, and rightfully so.
 
Now lick my black shaft.

The unwarranted petulance makes you sound 1%?

You have to have the honesty to admit that I was implying the observance of 3 principles in those posts: The rule of law, due process, and protection of democracy.

Law and proceedings are a given and not really principle in question in this case. So you get credit for not suggesting a mob string him up.

If you could speak coherently on how free speech and press are involved that'd be great. That's where the discussion lies. Well, at least the intelligent and (to me) interesting discussion. If this ain't your wheelhouse we can pick another subject you'd feel more comfortable with.

@N13 gave you a prodding. A 1%er like you surely picked up on it, yeah? I'd have this conversation with him but it's not his intellect I question.
 
You definitely don't get to toss in the NYT et al, because if their primary purpose was simply being a hub on the black market network for classified and illegally-obtained info, and appeared to be doing it to help a hostile power and a presidential candidate collude to take over the country, and helping to coordinate the release of that info with them, they would have America's dick up their asses too, and rightfully so.
OK
giphy.gif


I like you and would like to play, but I'm tired and need sleep.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top