Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (556104)	3/19/2010 10:39:34 PM
From: one_less	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583871

"Oh, good. You did do that. Well, that shows more initiative than you usually do. But, if so, why did you accuse me of disabling it?" My assumption that you were the one who corrupted it was wrong. Why, did I jump to that conclusion? Well the answer is pretty obvious and I've already provided it more than once. I accused you because it seemed reasonable to me under the circumstances. It was a reasonable conclusion given the circumstance, even if it turned out to be wrong, the circumstances were: 1) You declared the referent post does not exist. No one is that stupid, so I believed you to be promoting a lie and I still do. The post being refered to by the link does exist and you know it. The link and the context of the link were exactly the same as had been posted to you on many occasions. 2) It wouldn't be necessary for you to commit to memory the previous links because of the repetition and exactness of the repeated statement referring to the same post as evidence to know that the post exists. 3) You exploited the technical problem dishonestly by concluding a fact that you knew to be false. 4) You were being otherwise nasty and disingenuous. 5) You frequently make stuff up including finding facetious ways to attack me based on convoluted information. 6) Didn't anyone ever tell you about the little boy who called wolfe too many times, until everybody thought he was up to some screw ball thing, even when he wasn't. "So all your huffing and puffing about me lying and modifying the link was just your refusal to man up." No it wasn't. It was a mistake on my part which I have owned up to without hesitation, and further which I'm always ready, willing, and able to do. I don't equate making a mistake with 'refusal to man up.' I can, however, see how someone with your psycho issues would be unable or unwilling to make the distinction, or at least to attempt to exploit such a situation in an untoward manner. "Yet you will still claim you are honest." Of course. I know it for a fact. "" You proclaimed the referent post does not exist." It doesn't. Or, at least the link provided doesn't work. As you now admit, although still seem to be blaming me. The post being referred to (referent post) exists. We all know that since the link to it works in other instances, which you are witness to. I only blame you for being a psycho lying scumbag. I don't know why the link worked in some instances and not others. I don't blame you for that and I've admitted it was my mistake to jump to the conclusion that you had corrupted the link.