Social ***mozilla Firefox ceo forced to resign for personal views****

[glennrod]

a/s/l

31/AM/LA (Louisiana, not los angeles)

 

[UpaLoompa]

Not sure what point you think you're making but it's probably not a good one

Who needs good points when responding to TCK?

 

[IDL]

Name's not derrick and I am not interested in trapping or tripping you. I really could not care less about "winning" some internet argument. That you see a trap there demonstrates that you do recognize that your position is not at all logical and certainly is not consistent, it also isn't consistent with your own views on what defines christianity. That's all I wanted to point out. It might therefore be useful to ask yourself why you hold so strongly to a position that you know is neither logical nor consistent.

aka he fell into a trap of his own making! A game indeed.

 

[glennrod]

Name's not derrick and I am not interested in trapping or tripping you. I really could not care less about "winning" some internet argument. That you see a trap there demonstrates that you do recognize that your position is not at all logical and certainly is not consistent, it also isn't consistent with your own views on what defines christianity. That's all I wanted to point out. It might therefore be useful to ask yourself why you hold so strongly to a position that you know is neither logical nor consistent.

and that right there is why you are just a lil bit fucked up

 

[glennrod]

Who needs good points when responding to TCK?

You do, unless you think that you are the only one who is allowed to be obnoxious and senseless?

 

[UpaLoompa]

and that right there is why you are just a lil bit fucked up

I've honestly no idea what you mean.

 

[Jukai]

and that right there is why you are just a lil bit fucked up

Glen, there shouldn't BE a trap if there aren't any logical fallacies in your position

 

[glennrod]

I've honestly no idea what you mean.

you don't see it?, you don't see the amazing leaps you make in a debate to empower yourself?.

 

[glennrod]

Glen, there shouldn't BE a trap if there aren't any logical fallacies in your position

I know how it works, the person who does it is already anticipating you to say a certain thing, all they need is for to say it so they can then move onto phase 2, this is seriously amateur stuff

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Who needs good points when responding to TCK?

The more important question is, why even bother responding to him? He's the most dishonest person on this forum.

 

[Jukai]

I know how it works, the person who does it is already anticipating you to say a certain thing, all they need is for to say it so they can then move onto phase 2, this is seriously amateur stuff

Again, it's only amateur stuff when you see obvious flaws in someone's logic so you can obviously move them to an easy direction that shows their hypocrisy. No offense, but I was doing this in just about every response to you. You don't have a strong position here.

 

[UpaLoompa]

You do, unless you think that you are the only one who is allowed to be obnoxious and senseless?

TCK routinely shits up any thread about this sort of topic. The regular routine is to post a bunch of really stupid arguments against gay marriage which then get shot down page upon page. He does this for quite awhile, cycling through the same arguments in numerous threads. Then, after all his dumb arguments have been refuted he posts something to the effect of "Hey, wait a minute. I'm not actually against gay marriage."
It is quite silly and futile. Many of the posters in this thread have been down the same road with him and similarly find him to be insanely dishonest about it all.

Regardless, his comment in this thread about gay marriage and family dynamics is demonstrably dumb and was basically laughed at by the Supreme Court. His statement inanely argues for: 1) marriage only being allowed for couples able to reproduce, and 2) dissolving all marriages that have not, cannot, or will not in the future produce children.

 

[UpaLoompa]

you don't see it?, you don't see the amazing leaps you make in a debate to empower yourself?.

What leaps? The inconsistencies are in your position, not mine.

 

[UpaLoompa]

The more important question is, why even bother responding to him? He's the most dishonest person on this forum.

Good point, my apologies for contributing to the derail he invariably causes.

 

[glennrod]

Again, it's only amateur stuff when you see obvious flaws in someone's logic so you can obviously move them to an easy direction that shows their hypocrisy. No offense, but I was doing this in just about every response to you. You don't have a strong position here.

my position is very strong, because it will remain unchanged despite changing social dynamics and peer pressure. you may not think its right, but its stronger than you think. see, im not the kind of guy to devote myself to a particular ideology "because everyone else is"

 

[ABACA]

That's not the issue. The issue is that his feelings were hurt by the harassers on twitter who had no right since they didn't use money as their means of political speech.
That is borderline retarded. Parse your paragraph and try to make sense out of it.

That is borderline retarded. Parse your paragraph and try to make sense out of it.

Its not borderline retarded, its full blown retarded. Its also the position espoused by everyone's favorite moderator (although he is nether supporting the position nor is advocating for it).

Social media users = harassers. The only people who should be granted the privilege of having an opinion on the matter are people who purchase stock in the company. After all, the board of directors, as the representatives of stock holders, are in charge of hiring and firing CEOs. They need to listen to shareholders, not people on social media.


Had to reply to this. I now this was like a dozen pages ago, but the last dozen pages have been nothing but an argument between some people who will soon be swept, along with their religion, into the dustbins of history, and people who aren't crazy bigots.

 

[UpaLoompa]

my position is very strong, because it will remain unchanged despite changing social dynamics and peer pressure. you may not think its right, but its stronger than you think. see, im not the kind of guy to devote myself to a particular ideology "because everyone else is"

The strength of a position has nothing to do with whether it is fashionable or if you hold tightly to it.

 

[glennrod]

What leaps? The inconsistencies are in your position, not mine.

wrong, you are extremely inconsistent as you have a pro gay agenda, its as clear as day. when I hear about you sticking up for other minority groups (gingers, cripples, polygamists etc) then I will know you are the real deal, in the meantime you are just a pro gay hack, and that doesn't make you stand out very well, because we already have a zillion of those and your power to annoy isn't as strong as theirs

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Good point, my apologies for contributing to the derail he invariably causes.

No, it's fine...

I too find myself responding to his inane, ridiculous, and completely dishonest bull$hit.

It's better if we just laugh at him or ignore him all together.

He is truly a waste of time. Not a shred of honesty in him.

 

[glennrod]

the last dozen pages have been nothing but an argument between some people who will soon be swept, along with their religion, into the dustbins of history, and people who aren't crazy bigots.

yay, a world filled with annoying f-bombs who think that they are super smart, that's awesome, cant wait for that, oh, good luck with trying to convert all of the countries that don't and will not tolerate your bullshit

maybe you can find peace in the next life...oh wait, there is no after life, no nothing, just eternal blackness, no wonder you are so bitter and petulant