I breathe BR, not kidding homie.
Posted by: RighteousTyrant
Posted by: raad face
Heres what throws me off Foman,
Regardless of the thread's "discussion value"(which is debatable, but not the reason the thread was locked)
^That line,
so you explained it had little discussion value, a silly thread that had little meaning. However, you ended up concluding that, the discussion value was not the reason why it was banned. Thus Making the only reason it was locked because of it's misplacement violation.
That is not a cop-out, nor is it difficult to understand. The thread violated two rules, and I locked it for the more obvious violation.
Not just locking it for one, while it violated two. You locked it for one and then claimed it was not locked for the other- despite it violating two.
Regardless of the thread's "discussion value"(which is debatable, but not the reason the thread was locked)(which is debatable, but not the reason the thread was locked)but not the reason the thread was locked
meh, whatever.
just the way you phrased it really.
¯\_(0_o)_/¯
Just stop, you've clearly run out of steam because you're contradicting yourself now.
Earlier you said Foman implied that thread wouldn't be locked if posted here, which in effect means that you interpreted his comments as stating that the thread broke only one rule. Now you're saying that he said that it broke two rules. Which is it? I'm still saying it broke one rule because that's how he presented it in his original post, he's trying to say now that it violated both and he blamed it for one, i'm showing that's not possible because he clearly said he did not lock it for it's discussion value, leaving only the one single misplacement reasoning to lock the thread. Even if he did lock it for both reasons, the way it is presented in his original post on the first page is that it was locked for only the misplacement. Which would then in turn possibly lead someone to believe that thread would be appropriate if re posted in the community forum. How is that contradicting myself, it supports my original point?
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Honestly, you should quit with the nitpicking. Seriously, you're acting like a 12 year old who thinks he's tough -blam!- and can prove anyone wrong if he just argues enough.
^hahahahahahaha.k.
ok, i'm done, i'm just trying to clarify my argument that's all.
[Edited on 10.27.2011 8:05 PM PDT]