Where do I begin, little Stevie...
Let's start here:
Nice... now why don't you call me something condescending like "little stevie".
Okie, Dokie, little Stevie...
By the way, I'll be leaving Alaska in about a month for either New Haven or Harvard Square, will that somehow make my words more important.
No. Your lack of insight and mundane prose will be just as dull and inane. Nice try though...
Typically when people engage in ad hominem it's because they have nothing of substance. You are not an exception in this case.
I can easily make the same case about you given your ad hominem posting history. For example, you made the following statements in you last post:
This makes your argument more convincing... good job..LOL..
Ah yes. Top notch work.
Although, the more a discussion develops, the more obvious it becomes that you are fairly limited.
Apparently, you are not exempt from the trappings of an ad hominem argument, eh? BTW, I am impressed with the vocabulary exercises. You have apparently pulled out all the stops (and your thesaurus) just for me. LOL...
I stated in the previous post: Based on your posting history on this thread, you do have some sort of criteria for acceptable posting.
You have followed up with:
Nope. All I have is an expectation that someone posting will have what I consider a rational reasoning for posting. You don't, so I think you are irrational. I find it amazing that you don't attempt to offer a compelling reason in order to convince others that you are a rational person.
You are simply arguing semantics here; the outcomes are the same. Let's call your criteria for acceptable posting the JW STEVE EXPECTATION THEORY. It goes like this:
JW STEVE EXPECTATION THEORY
Where:
A = poster offers JW Steve a compelling reason for posting
B = Rational Poster according to JW Steve
C = Irrational Poster according to JW Steve
If A then
Poster = B
Else
Poster = C
Endif
Unfortunately, little Stevie, your theory has two very serious flaws: 1. You have set yourself up as judge and jury and 2. Internet Anonymity.
JW Steve- Judge and Jury
Do I really need to comment this? I think it really speaks for itself. Apparently, I have already been placed in your irrational pile anyway. Seems kind of foolish for you to continue engaging an irrational poster, eh?
Internet Anonymity
According to you, a financial interest is the most compelling reason for making posts to threads at SI. Are you saying that you actually believe the musings of an unknown and anonymous poster who claims to hold a financial interest? At this point I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. My suggestion: apply your Expectation Theory with equal force to those who claim to be investors and continuously hype stocks on SI. Or maybe your not interested in engaging a thread hypester in an ad hominem conversation about compelling reasons for posting?
As of right now, I haven't made any money. I sold 2/3 of my position for 1.5 times the purchase price (roughly) and have the remaining 1/3 of my position.
Do I believe you? If my name was JW Steve, I would gobble up this misinformation and dub you Sir PoststheTruth. I would also emphatically state that you were a rational poster who should be trusted, believed and revered.
They find you terribly boorish.
Right back at ya...
I have no doubt I could have elicited another "In your words", but I tried to do it with class and it back fired.
Based on your naive beliefs, the only thing you could elicit is a case of bad breath...
I always find that winning something is better when you do it in style.
I do too. However, I win with style, not in style as you suggest...
Have a nice day,
Diz-
|
