Skip to main content
Topic: [TOS #2/5] Re: more 192kHz nonsense? (Read 1355 times) previous topic - next topic - Topic derived from more 192kHz nonsense?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: more 192kHz nonsense?

Reply #50
@sartoga So, I have misunderstood... eh? You asked me "where have they insulted you?", I posted a list a few things they said to me, including dumbass, butthurt, piss-off and other really lovely compliments. What have I misunderstood? And exactly where have I "attacked" anyone, as you say? The only thing I have said all along is "quit the baiting", and the rest was replying to the nonsensical accusations. I don't know where you draw this idea that I have somehow attacked anyone here, but it doesn't come from any honest place.

@greynol You still cling to passive-agressive mockery instead of taking action.
Either enforce your dogma or stop the nonsense.
As for the 3 questions. I'll post them here for the last time. You people can decide to answer them or not. I won't continue further than this, as you have decided to prevent it from going anywhere.

I'm just copy-pasting from the last time that I asked these (which was already the 3rd time), in response to this statement by greynol:
Quote
As I already said, radorn is welcome to argue how creationism isn't faith-based pseudoscience like placebophilia is in another discussion in the off-topic forum.  If he feels people are being unfair in the comparison he can then point them to the other topic to have that discussion there.

That sort of answers one of my question #1 [When someone makes that kind of comparison, what kind of response is acceptable to show my disagreement?]
So, If I understand it correctly, if someone goes on to claim or imply that creation is a pseudoscientifical bullshit in any thread on the forum, interested users (like me) can't answer that in the same thread, but, instead what they should do is open an Off-Topic thread and link that into the original thread?

This begs question #3 again [Is it also allowed to say that evolution is, and evolutionists say "bullshit", as others have said (repeatedly) about creation?]
So, is it allowed to say in any thread in the forum that evolution is a bullshit pseudocience and their proponents say bullshit? and if one does that, should others also open Off-Topic threads as an answer instead of replying in the same thread?

This leaves question #2 [Is it acceptable to present the case that evolutionism is pseudocience in response to the same accusation expressed towards creation?]
pelmazo did just that minutes ago in this very thread. He didn't have to move it to Off-Topic, and he even received praise from moderation. Is that official policy that applies to all users and all opinions on that issue?

It's been implied repeatedly that I must take a hint and consider them answered. I get exactly what you want, I'm not an idiot or irreflexive as many of you have said. But I'm not settling for that. I consider the "hint" that I must take from all that's been said to be a bigoted biased proposition, and I'm not going to "shut it and suck it". If you consider are so right about your position, why don't be bold and state it unambiguously here and now? You have the power to enforce all of this if that's what you want, but it seems you are afraid or ashamed of... something. I don't know, you tell me.

You know what... forget all that, just ban me already. I'm fed up with this. It's not worth it.
I'm leaving for I don't know how long. Maybe I'll come back some day and find out if I'm still a member or not.

Cheers.

Re: more 192kHz nonsense?

Reply #51
He's been a jerk about it since March 3rd.  I should have slapped a muzzle on him then.

To restate my stance:

1. Equating a non-scientific/faith-based (bullshit) approach for defending the need for 192kHz samplerates to the non-scientific/faith-based (bullshit) approach for defending creationism is perfectly OK.  Why?  It should be self evident: we are a science-based community that rejects the positing of faith-based (bullshit) arguments.

2. Pissing and moaning about #1 is not acceptable.

3. Engaging in a tangential discussion about how the two things in #1 are not the same in this topic is not acceptable; however taking the food-fight over to the off-topic forum will be allowed in order to appease the OP.  That is the best he can hope to get.

4. It's not fair?  Too bad, so sad.  The OP is no way obligated to continue digging this hole for himself.

@radorn

In response to the idiotic questions being asked of me which up to this point were somehow not addressed(?) by the policy that I've laid out:

Question #1:
When someone makes that kind of comparison, what kind of response is acceptable to show my disagreement?

Answer #1:
You respectfully state that you disagree and move on.  You don't tell someone to shut up either in English or whatever you think is the native language of the person to whom you're addressing.  Further attempts to squelch these comparisons which have since been deemed acceptable will not be tolerated.  Why?  See #1 above.

Question #2:
Is it acceptable to present the case that evolutionism is pseudocience in response to the same accusation expressed towards creation?

Answer #2:
Evolutionism (which to me is just a silly construct created by people who have a faith-based and adversarial world view) isn't pseudoscience.  But to humor you, see #3 above.

Question #3:
Is it also allowed to say that evolution is, and evolutionists say "bullshit", as others have said (repeatedly) about creation?

Answer #3:
See #3 above.

PS: Your recent post was removed since it was more of the same whining and I was already in the process of crafting this response.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

 

Re: more 192kHz nonsense?

Reply #52
I have some suggestions:
Crank up your stereo and let someone complain about the noise.
Drive your car too fast and get a speeding ticket.
Buy an expensive bottle of single malt and drink it like it was cheap.
Anything but this...

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018