Yggstyle

Gonna need to ask santa for that next year ;) you juuust missed the cutoff.

I’m quietly praying a certain launch goes so we’ll we see a steam phone eventually.

… I feel like for a very specific group this is probably like getting an extra scoop of icecream when they only paid for one.

I, for one, cannot wait for my ram to rootkit me. But at least it will have rgb.

Jokes aside if this helps with ram pricing that’d be cool. I don’t think it will - but it’d be nice.

Mind blown.

I know we seem to be trending towards brain damaged children as leadership of our countries as of late… But… Did they just literally go: “no u?”

Look. Hackaday… If it’s a slow week… We get it. Take a day off. We still like you. Just… Less of this please.

Nevermind the fact most readers and tablets come -with- a cover … So its almost like a book anyway. Which people fold behind the page. Like a book. What was that extra screen doing again?

Just remember to try really hard to not to seed it and say it’s training data… And it’s fair use.

To summarize: I’ve added nothing to my initial points because there is nothing I need to add. Every subsequent reply I’ve made has been to explain this, and the reasons for this, to you. I am quite happy to continue doing this as long as you would like.

And as it is your opinion - you’re welcome to it… But unfortunately that doesn’t make it correct. My behavior, as you keep insinuating, is based simply on my opinion not aligning with your own. And, as I stated before, I’m fine with that.

The reason you keep needing to produce such large blocks of “logic” … Despite:

nothing I need to add

I don’t believe I have to say anything more here

I have no interest in this discussion becoming a debate

You aren’t debating. You have nothing to add. You are “resolute” in a baseless observation that suits your needs.

To quote office space: “what is it you’d say - that you do here?”

Genuinely, while funny, I’m going to need to go source more rope because you seem intent on just taking more and more in making the most rube-goldbergian noose I’ve ever witnessed.

If you want to actually have a discussion or debate the topic - I’m still happy to engage on that. But if you insist on just rehashing your own opinion as some infallible fact - I find that sometimes it’s just better to let children tantrum themselves out.

I have no interest in this discussion becoming a debate.

And yet…

I have made my assertions, have maintained those assertions consistently and those assertions have since been shown to be completely validated.

Ah yes “I have made a assertion… And then arvived at the difficult conclusion that my own assertion is correct.” This child like circular logic could best be added to with a reinforcing such iron-clad reasoning with some sort of additional …

There continues to be nothing that I need to add to that.

Hah. This brings joy. The pure contradiction makes this the cherry on top.

I digress - If you’ve nothing to discuss… And your assessment is beyond reproach - seeing you determined it as such… One does wonder how such strong, unwavering, statements need so much attention to remain standing. The mind boggles.

For someone with so little to say and so little you’re willing to discuss… It does amuse how dutifly you return to parrot the same thing, claim you words to be self-evident, and then huffily exit again. Its almost endearing.

It’s like you and one other guy who can’t seem to understand what the entire rest of the thread is telling you.

Sorry I don’t subscribe to group think and believe in open discourse?

You don’t want to understand. You want to be mad.

I’m not sure you grasp the nuance of discussion outside whatever COD match you crawled out of. If you are genuinely convinced someone discussing something is “mad” … You must live in a pretty dark place. That’s simply not how normal people are… If that’s something you expect - that’s rough.

This isn’t “nuh uh”, it’s just you not understanding English.

Boil down for me what your interpretation is of that statement the girl made in panel 4. Why is it “about what she expected?” Why would she expect it?

Go on. Explain english to me. I’d love to discuss this.

… He asked lamenting the fact that language arts is no longer taught in schools.

I’ll wait.

There’s been no psychoanalysis, cyclical or otherwise, occuring here. Simply a recounting of your directly observable behavior and the things you have said.

I have repeatedly emphasized how, in this discussion, I have stayed on the single topic of criticizing your behavior. You have already admitted that you have approached these discussions in bad faith. As a result I’m not interested in entertaining what I am unfortunately forced to consider might be, given your earlier admissions, less-than-genuine attempts to engage in discussion.

It’s not my opinion that you do things like that, its your own stated position. I don’t enjoy having to assume you’re not acting in good faith, but when you admit you don’t engage in good faith, the only reasonable thing for me to do is to assume you were telling the truth.

Again, my intial justified criticism of your behavior is the topic here, and once again that’s the sole topic I am willing to entertain in this discussion.

The response you are obsessing about was midway through our exchange where it had become comically apparent you’d become incapable of anything outside of this apparent “you you you.” In most debates - if you opponent needs to shift to personal attacks and comments on your as a person… They’ve lost.

Frankly, at that point you probably noticed a shift where I was simply having fun with the reaponses as I took you less seriously as time went on. And if I’m being honest, what reason have I to take you seriously? You are avoiding topic matter for whatever this broken record is. My “behavior,” as you put it, boils down to a differing opinion and willingness to discuss it openly. As mentioned before: ghastly behavior… Indeed. As this chain continues to highlight - I am open to discussing such things and you aren’t. Son, that’s not a me problem. I’d recommend a mirror… Or perhaps a book on debate. That’d at least make for a more interesting exchange. Presently I’m only getting mild amusement out of the broken record responses… And were veering dangerously close to that shifting to pity.

In my defense I’m waiting for the coffee to kick in… But I thought the image belonged to this post and I had a giggle.

Wrong leveeeeeeeeer!

Sorta like north korea then. Understandable why they got the job… Must have felt like home.

Dont tread on him, he’s fallen and can’t figure out how to get up.

Add street fighter to the list of games and I can personally guarantee your correctness.

Your comment and logic falls flat when, in another thread, you’ve been speaking with me about the topic at hand without deviating into this cyclical psychoanalysis you’ve defaulted to where the rules are made up and the points don’t matter. If you dont want to engage on the root topic or the points I made along the way… That’s perfectly fine. That’s your opinion - but don’t tout it as some infallible fact when you can’t even remain consistent on your observations from thread to thread. Enjoy the book.

So explain to me and the other posters who identified the same issue are incorrect in our interpretation… And you somehow are correct in yours. You’ve provided the equivalent of “nuh uh” to the argument.

Alright, but you’re literally doing the exact same thing right here. You’re using a generalization about a group to make conclusions about the behavior of that group.

What group am I making generalizations about? What conclusions? Genuinely asking - I’m quite certain I am not.

In reference to members of a group engaging in negative behavior, you characterize those people who engage in that behavior negatively. I’m a person, and I resent the implication that I might also unfairly dogpile someone discussing this topic based off the actions of this group.

Hmm, If this is what you are referring to perhaps we need to clarify something. Generally selecting a group to make a statement about is not inherently wrong… Its what you do with it that can be.

Example:

“children’s minds have not fully developed” vs “children all reek of bo”

Both of these statements select [most/all] children generically as a group. One is based in fact… And one contains opinion. Presenting that opinion in a way that might hurt somone isn’t a crime… Although it can be presented in bad faith. The major issue is really where somone presents a counter opinion and they are rebuked for it. As before, I imagine you can see some parallels here.