The War Room Bet Thread V3

[HomerThompson]

I'm not convinced that such a "true level" exists. Why do you think it does?


@SBJJ is this a fair characterization of what happened?



I'll disagree with him on that. I don't think it makes him a person of "subnormal intellect".


I don't accept that characterization.



Not that I accept your premise, but would that make him "vulgar" or "undignified"?



If we just look at quality of bets, it's pretty obvious that @SBJJ is superior. He's got a near-evens proposition locked in with you, the so-called betting champion.

By contrast, @HomerThompson has overexposed himself to the event that Trump is still in office on January 1, 2020. He will be very lucky if that bet hits for him. You even criticized him for that bet, but not without noting "Homer, you know I love you, but..."

For a while I thought HomerThompson was a bot. I only saw him post hotdog gifs. He purports to be very concerned with racism and has criticized others for language that can be twisted to be prejudicial of black people but he has no problem cracking jokes about Asian people eating dogs.

I do see a huge difference between SBJJ and HomerThompson---the former is a higher-quality poster than the latter.

(Homer my man, don't take it personally. I believe you can improve.)

 

[Jack V Savage]

I'm not convinced that such a "true level" exists. Why do you think it does?

Sigh. Do you agree that a portion of quarterly change in GDP reflects random variation rather than real trends? You do, right? If you take out that random variation, then, the number would be different. I think that we can expect around 1% per worker (1.2% last year, 0.0% the year before that, and 1.3% the year before that--generally grows faster in recessions, for obvious reasons), and then some growth in the number of workers. But variation around those numbers is pretty unpredictable and I think less meaningful.

@SBJJ is this a fair characterization of what happened?

You don't have to ask him. Look for yourself:

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/w...-than-hillary-1-his-cell-phone.3792105/page-5

He didn’t say Clinton did. But someone else did use a surname

Everyone in the Obama administration used surnames. Hillary is known to have used two in her life. Impeach them all! Madonna for president!

U up for an account bet on this?

U really post a lot of BS

An account bet that the Obama administration was entirely staffed by people who used surnames?

U up for it. Because I know 2 for sure off the top of my head that did not

Who in Obama's administration didn't use surnames? Did I miss Cher being Secretary of the Treasury or something?

Note that I could have tricked him and won the bet, but I don't stoop to that kind of tactic (hint, hint). And don't tell me you can't see that he's subnormal after reading that. I could link you other examples to make the same point.

 

[SBJJ]

Sigh. Do you agree that a portion of quarterly change in GDP reflects random variation rather than real trends? You do, right? If you take out that random variation, then, the number would be different. I think that we can expect around 1% per worker (1.2% last year, 0.0% the year before that, and 1.3% the year before that--generally grows faster in recessions, for obvious reasons), and then some growth in the number of workers. But variation around those numbers is pretty unpredictable and I think less meaningful.



You don't have to ask him. Look for yourself:

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/w...-than-hillary-1-his-cell-phone.3792105/page-5













Note that I could have tricked him and won the bet, but I don't stoop to that kind of tactic (hint, hint). And don't tell me you can't see that he's subnormal after reading that. I could link you other examples to make the same point.

Interesting how my quote says 2 that did not use them. If you can not see that was an error in the 1 post you have problems. Once again look at the first and fifth post you are quoting. Now put a not in that first post. You seeing it now

But hey, you will see what you see.

No you could not have tricked me because it was a misspoke post I would see after it was written up.

I really am sorry you are so riled up. I mean it man. I don’t want you to continue stopping to my sub human level with these continual insults

Stay high brow. Stay classy

 

[SBJJ]

Wai. I will gladly lend you Jacks scalp at the end of the year

This is what set Jack off. Quite possibly one of the most innocent jokes to be posted on this forum. Lol

This post seriously set him off. This joke

And I’m vulgar and undignified? You’ve been asked to post my vulgar and undignified posts also. Where are they? You’ve posted me screwing up a post and insinuating I don’t know the definition of surname. Let us assume that is true, that is still not Vulgar or undignified. Do you not know the meaning of vulgar or undignified? Are those 2 words you have heard the media use to describe Trump so you just assumed they were bad qualities for a person?

 

[SBJJ]

Would you not agree that calling a poster vulgar without any examples is actually very undignified on your part

 

[SBJJ]

Now Jack. I have a few things I need to do before I hit the hay. This in no way means I am running away or going into hiding. And there is a decent possibility I may leave for a day or two. Do not worry, it does not mean I committed suicide due to you exposing me as a simpleton.

We shall communicate again, maybe minus the insults next time. I think it’s very feasible. I will make a strong attempt on being less vulgar also

 

[waiguoren]

Note that I could have tricked him and won the bet, but I don't stoop to that kind of tactic (hint, hint).

Which of my bets do you accuse me of winning or potentially winning based on "trickery"?

 

[Limbo Pete]

I don't think either of you gets enough credit for how long you can say stuff

 

[Lead]

I don't think either of you gets enough credit for how long you can say stuff

Waits for incoming quote of the above, sliced into five different sections arguing to the point where I don't even know the purpose.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Which of my bets do you accuse me of winning or potentially winning based on "trickery"?

Ugh. I'm not getting into that, but what did you think of the exchange I posted? Can you not see why someone would consider the guy to be dim-witted? Look at his reaction to my mention of that episode.

 

[waiguoren]

Note that I could have tricked him and won the bet, but I don't stoop to that kind of tactic (hint, hint).

Which of my bets do you accuse me of winning or potentially winning based on "trickery"?

Ugh. I'm not getting into that

Which of my bets do you accuse me of winning or potentially winning based on "trickery"?

 

[Jack V Savage]

I think GDP reflects the total value of goods and services exhanged in the economy over a given time period. What is the source of the "random variation" to which you refer?

So it seems like he mistakenly used the term "surname" to mean something like "alias", right? Is this your evidence that he is "vulgar and undignified"?

That's a clear violation of the bro code. You throw bombs, you must expect a counter.

I repeat: Which of my bets do you accuse me of winning or potentially winning based on "trickery"?

This constant playing dumb just has me too bored to go on.

My offer of a meta bet (you and I bet that I'll beat SBJJ) stands, I believe that you recognize that he's subnormal (dumb, uneducated, boorish) but do not want to acknowledge it out of tribal loyalty, and you should take a clue from my graciousness in dealing with the guy who thought that we were going to have the biggest crash the world has ever seen starting in 2015.

 

[waiguoren]

This constant playing dumb just has me too bored to go on.

I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't accuse me of "playing dumb". I almost always make a good faith effort to respond to your posts. Maybe I'm really just dumb (I doubt it), or maybe my mind works differently from yours (more likely). Even when I find some of your writings absurd, I refrain from personal insults.

My offer of a meta bet (you and I bet that I'll beat SBJJ) stands

Again, I don't take near-even-odds props.

I believe that you recognize that he's subnormal (dumb, uneducated, boorish)

I genuinely do not find him to be dumb. In fact, I have already written that I find him to be bright.

Uneducated...it's possible, but I don't know enough to judge for certain and anyway I put very little (sometimes, negative) emphasis on formal education in developing one's mind.

Could you link me to a few posts of his in which he acted boorishly? Would you say that @HomerThompson is more or less boorish than him?

you should take a clue from my graciousness in dealing with the guy who thought that we were going to have the biggest crash the world has ever seen starting in 2015.

I'm confused. Was that @SBJJ, or someone else?

 

[Jack V Savage]

I genuinely do not find him to be dumb. In fact, I have already written that I find him to be bright.

Uneducated...it's possible, but I don't know enough to judge for certain and anyway I put very little (sometimes, negative) emphasis on formal education in developing one's mind.

Who said anything about formal education? One can forgo formal education and still be very well-read and self-taught. But such a person isn't going to write like a back-row high-school student, reference quarterly GDP predictions by "all unbiased economists," argue to death about a word he doesn't know the meaning of without ever bothering to hit a dictionary, believe that the MSM spins to hurt Trump, believe that GDP growth is primarily about the president, etc.

Could you link me to a few posts of his in which he acted boorishly? Would you say that @HomerThompson is more or less boorish than him?

I believe he's been acting boorishly throughout this thread. But let's do this: You collect some posts of his that you think indicate brightness, and I'll provide still more links (remember, I already linked an exchange that I think makes my case pretty well) demonstrating boorishness.

I'm confused. Was that @SBJJ, or someone else?

Someone else. What does that have to do with anything? I gave an example. We had a specific point of disagreement, and while he agreed to take the loss, he claimed that he made a mistake in taking the bet, and thus I saw no value in accepting his concession. Do you understand?

 

[SBJJ]

Who said anything about formal education? One can forgo formal education and still be very well-read and self-taught. But such a person isn't going to write like a back-row high-school student, reference quarterly GDP predictions by "all unbiased economists," argue to death about a word he doesn't know the meaning of without ever bothering to hit a dictionary, believe that the MSM spins to hurt Trump, believe that GDP growth is primarily about the president, etc.



I believe he's been acting boorishly throughout this thread. But let's do this: You collect some posts of his that you think indicate brightness, and I'll provide still more links (remember, I already linked an exchange that I think makes my case pretty well) demonstrating boorishness.



Someone else. What does that have to do with anything? I gave an example. We had a specific point of disagreement, and while he agreed to take the loss, he claimed that he made a mistake in taking the bet, and thus I saw no value in accepting his concession. Do you understand?

Welp, nothing really needs to be said. The undignified posts speak for themselves

At least I’ve graduated to uneducated and boorish, from Vulgar and undignified

Yipeeee for me

Jack, take some deep breaths, lay off the insults for a day or two. This is not healthy

You are a smart guy, we know that. Smile and enjoy life a little

 

[SBJJ]

What will I be tomorrow Jack.

Day 1: Vulgar & Undignified. Asked for examples and tumbleweeds

Day 2: Uneducated & Boorish

Day3: Smelly & Hyperactive? I’m half black so maybe you could call me a half breed or Oreo? I mean, why limit your insults? Go Big or Go Home!

And why give any actual examples? The dignified thing to do is just openly insult people with no back up. That’s what smart dudes like you do, Right?

 

[SBJJ]

I’m just going to take ONE thing you said Jack. You said I believe that GDP is PRIMARILY because of the president. This is a 100% fabrication. An outright lie. I have never said that. I will bet you anything you can not quote me saying such.

It really is hard to counter someone who is willing to do this sort of thing. And you do it frequently.

 

[SBJJ]

If full year GDP is over 2.9 I win. Nearly all unbiased economists believe this likely to happen now. Q3 will likely be stronger than Q2 as most tracking shows it over 4%. There is also the issue of inventories being drawn down in Q2 which should lead to a blip up in Q3.

Jack likes to call people partisan/tribalistic to make himself feel better. It’s his go to move

Also notice how Jack has REPEATEDLY misrepresented this post of mine by leaving out the key word NEARLY. And most predictions I have viewed do believe 2018 will run greater than 2.9%. With many believing 3+ likely. I even posted a link after you asked me.

So Jack, now that we know you have lied and misrepresented posts in this thread, which of us is conducting himself in a boorish undignified manner?

 

[SBJJ]

Jack is currently searching the thread where I said POLICY CAN have an effect on GDP. A forum in which he called me stupid for believing that. Then later in the same thread he said the Obama stimulus package helped boost GDP. In which I agreed, policy CAN have an effect on GDP

 

[Jack V Savage]

Dude, take a deep breath, compose your thoughts, and then edit them down and into one post. Or better yet, keep them to yourself.

Jack is currently searching the thread where I said POLICY CAN have an effect on GDP. A forum in which he called me stupid for believing that. Then later in the same thread he said the Obama stimulus package helped boost GDP. In which I agreed, policy CAN have an effect on GDP

???