Since
you have a hard time following a thread, i'll answer each of your points in order, so as not to confuse your little head:
1) Try sticking to what we were actually discussing. At no point in any of my posts did I say that I thought a negligent lfs was better than a negligent walmart, but of course someone with your limited intellect can't be bothered with such things and instead chooses to spout off complety untrue statements.
2)Again, due to your
paris hiltonesque intellectual prowess (or lack thereof) you assume that the double post was for post count purposes. This is because you are have a negatively biased view of myself and can only take into account the most negative of possibilites for my actions. If you had done your studying you would know that there is an actual sc term for this mindset known as the "halo effect," but I doubt you'll ever understand the concept. The actual purpose of the double post was so that I could adress another person's thread, and I have not yet figured out how to quote two seperate posts in my own responsorial post.
3) This is a forum, aka, a discussion board, which, by its namesake, we can discern that it is for the purpose of discussion. A dialogue between persons with differing opinions, in which these persons express those points, is necessary in order to have what is known as "discussion." You obviously can not handle a discussion because even your very fist post consisted of inflamatory statements and contained no contribution towards constructive discussion whatsoever.
4)Yet again, instead of posing your viewpoints, with valid supports, you revert to childish name calling. You have obviously been indoctrinated by a certain ideological viewpoint from which your mind can not stray. You demonstrate this by taking the fact that I have proven walmart unethical, and equate this with "arogant anti-establishment hippy," despite the fact that I only spoke negatively of one establishment in this entire thread, and have given adequate evidence to support a disssaproving attitude towards this company.
Also, you have conveniently overlooked the fact that you call me anti-establishment, yet in your very first point you try to claim (which I never said) that I beleive that an lfs is better than a walmart. So you see, you have a contradiction problem because if your first statement were true, it would completely illegitimize your "anti-establishment" statement, seeing as how, accrding to you, I like lfs', which are also establishments. But someone like you again can not be bothered with details and instead fabricates statments in order to suit your narrowminded objective.
Let me add my own point, which I'm sure you will not be able to comprehend. You have proven yourself ignorant and irrelevant, as well as a flamer and a troll. First, instead of using your intellect to provide a logical argument that opposes that which I have posted, you instead use inflamatory statements in order to portray in a negative light, those who you oppose, and to deflect attention away from the fact that you are an idiot and can't possibly come up with a constructive and intelligent post about why you disagree with my opinions.
Then, after I adress your questions with nothing less than clear and concise argument, you reply with yet more inflamatory blabbering. You provide absolutley no support for your view point, but you do add some name calling and an ironic use of the words ignorant and arrogant. My friend, Please do yourself a favor and look up those words.
Ignorant -
1. Lacking education or knowledge.
2. Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.
3. Unaware or uninformed.
4. lacking comprehension
In your use of ignorant, you fail, because I have given quite detailed explanations, with support, for my opinions, whereas you give nothing, and can not even adequately comprehend my posts because, you my freind are "lacking in knowledge" of discourse, and are "unaware" of the proper way to participate.
Arrogant -
1. Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance.
2. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others: an arrogant contempt for the weak. See Synonyms at proud.
"self-worth" and "self-importance" had no relevancy to this thread whatsoever until you showed up. Until then each member of the forum was participating in a civilized discusion pertaining to the topic. When you entered, you immediately displayed a "sense of overbearing self-worth and self-importance" by assuming that you were correct, failed to properly read the posts of others, provide any sort of support for your viewpoint, byou misrepresented the posts of others and yet expected people to listen to what you said, just because you said it.
Next time my friend, try insulting me with words that know the meaning of, and that actually apply accurately to the situation. You would make an excellent politician my friend. The aquarist hobby requires an ability to research, learn, and apply learned concepts, which you can do none of. I suggest, for the sake of the fish, you leave the hobby immediately, and apply for an internship working for your local political representative.
I appologize to all others, especially if you felt offended by antyhing I said. Let us please return to the discussion of fish related topics.
[snapback]926269[/snapback]
[/quote]
no need to get nasty and personal, it makes these threads really unpleasant to follow and i doubt most of here don't care to here you bashing others.
