Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">bah

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

IF - didn't you once say you would never post in this thread again? Oh, wait, that was in the Posts that dissapeared, wasn't it?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Nope. Never said that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I've reconsidered; this is the nonsense thread, so posting like Fyron is appropriet here.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ July 21, 2003, 07:46: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Well, as I never post like nonsense (in any serious postings), that is quite insulting.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Perhaps we are using slightly different definitions of nonsense; just recently, you got into an argument with Geo - you'd made a rather absolute statement that Geo took issue with; you later said something less absolute, but maintained that you had said the exact same thing with different wording the first time. To the best of my knoweledge, you never stated publicly that you might have overstated the first time. I consider that nonsense. You might not. I suppose differing definitions of nonsense might lead you to be insulted, so I apologize for the misunderstanding.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Bah. My original statement said exactly what I meant it to say.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Uh huh.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Paraphrase:(Used correctly) AND Talisman => (Impossible to defeat)

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Nothing I have said implies that it is impossible to lose if playing well with the talisman."
Paraphrase: (Playing well) AND talisman <> (impossible to defeat)

Compare that to the first paraphrase:
(Used correctly) AND Talisman => (Impossible to defeat)

Assuming that "Used correctly" is a subset of "Playing well", those two paraphrases are at odds with each other.

So, are we going to do this with real logic, where you walk through your reading and mine to find specific points of contention, or are you just going to contradict me and leave it at that?
<hr>
For reference, the thread I pulled the Last two quotes from: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

<hr><hr>
Or do you mean the one where you were incensed at my insulting you by "original statement"?

Edit: added a "paraphrase" that I had forgotten to make it clear that I'm repeating what I read Fyron's post as translated into a light Version of set notation, rather than saying something of my own.

Edit: changed "second" to "Last" for clairity on which two quotes I was referring to on the reference section.

Edit: changed "=" to "=>" for better set notation.

Edit: Notation explanation: A => B is A implies B; A <> B is A does not imply B

[ July 21, 2003, 09:35: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

For anyone who hasn't yet been shown. Entertainment lies here.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Jack, I don't know if this thread is the place for it, but I do think your logic there is pretty solid. Fyron and I continued our conversation offline for sometime. He steadfastly refuses to conceed either that there was anything wrong with his initial statement, or that his two statements are in any way contradictory. He did come close to conceeding that for his initial statement to be correct it had to be assumed you were playing a game in which allied victory was an option. It is apparently his conviciotn that either that stipulation should be understood inherantly in the phrase "used correctly", or at least that the phrase "used correctly" is somehow vague enough as to cover any sort of optional game settings or victory conditions and not limited to in game performance as I reasonably took it to mean. Obviously I think that argument is equivalent to a substantial quanity of bat guano, but eh,whadaygonnado? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Geoschmo

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Me, I'm going to try to convince Fyron to put the nonsense he calls "arguing" into the appropriet space - this nonsense thread. Mind you, he won't recognize that it is nonsense, and will probably take exception to this post. To the best of my knoweledge, Fyron has never admitted he's wrong (I did a search once - he had no Posts where "I am wrong" or "I'm wrong" constituted a phrase that he seriously meant - although I did find an interesting dodge when there was no possible way any sane person could concievably agree that Fyron was right in that instance.

Oh, and I suppose I did miss a common tactic Fyron uses when I was asking him what he was going to do - stop responding.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

I am going to just jump in, and say everyone should follow Loser's advice. Go here. Right now. Or Strong Bad will kick the Cheat.

TROGDOR!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Strong Bad kicks The Cheat?

I think Strong Bad kicks Strong Sad.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Strong Bad does indeed kick The Cheat. You have not watched enough if you never saw that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

And Fyron appears to go with "stop responding". Hmm. Curious.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

well, it seems to me if your playing well with the talisman, your using it correctly. and if your using it correctly, your playing well. at least in that area. you could use the talisman correctly and play horribly in every other area.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

booga booga.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Seems you want more posting - okay.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes; it isn't in doubt that you can play (overall) poorly while using some specific aspect of the game correctly. However, is it possible to play well without using your advantages correctly?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

well, if your playing as well as you know how, but you don't know how very well.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">My sentiments exactly, Mulligutherum.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

I guess the validity of that argument would depend on whether you're using an individual measure of "playing well" or a relatively absolute one. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I think that qualifies as enough nonsense for this thread.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Is there any such thing as enough nonsense for this thread?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">who's Mulli-whatsit?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Oh, wait - nevermind, don't wait.

[ July 22, 2003, 08:03: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Warden of the earthmen in Under-earth, Silver Chair, C.S.Lewis.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Has anyone else noticed that only this thread and the shiny RP thread have been replied to in about 45 minutes?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

and this one keeps ending up at the top of the list since i posted 'booga booga' and the other second every time i look.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Of course; who else in crazy enough to be up at this hour?

[ July 22, 2003, 08:14: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Maybe we can hit another century post before going to bed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Either Fyron or myself got the Last century post; the other got the Last century reply.

Umm, were 70 Posts away from the next century post....

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Are you going to let a little obstacle like that stop you? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

All right, I got the century post, Fyron got the century reply.

Oh, I don't know, we might get to it.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Jack, perhaps you would like to explain to our listeners why I can never see your name in the Recently Visitors list ever? Is it some new type of cloaking device?

[edit]Oh, and it's officially been an hour now since anyone else has bothered to post. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ July 22, 2003, 08:31: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

you can find him in the forum list. i asked about that before.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Do we have listeners at this hour?

There are several different ways to do it:
1) use the "hide from recent visitors list" option under your profile (what Fyron does, Last I heard)

2) Get to threads through Get Daily page; the recent visitors list only applies to people who visit the page with the list on it, not the threads in the section of the forum (this is what I do).

3) You can log out and back in repeatedly; you will show up in the recent visitors list as a guest.

4) you can bookmark threads and jump to them directly (I do this as well).

5) reserved for any methods I don't know about.

BTW - check again.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

Guess were not getting another century post tonight. Oh well. G'night.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

hey can i? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

yes im crazy to be up. but im not listening - im reading.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

well, yep. maybe not tonight, but you can get it. doesn't mean you will.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

isnt it the most appropriate place to see if my new sig works?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

squeak.

i think that means yes. mouse is a very emotive depended language.

[ July 22, 2003, 09:26: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

its a contest. did anyone win anything?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

contest?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

well, dependant on whose emotions? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Unfortunately, it was just a computer-printed certificate; they didn't have much of a budget.

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

*sigh* so bad. did i win anything though?

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

The Eye: Run your curser over the image when it appears ... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

http://www.sunbelt-software.com/stu/eye.htm

[ July 22, 2003, 19:24: Message edited by: Wardad ]

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

well, the mouses of course.

that's intelligent mouse, anyway. normal mouse is really simplistic.

i inspired a name change? that's two! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ July 23, 2003, 07:36: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

Re: 320.2! 301.5, 311.3, 65.4
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Congradulations!
*Hands Narf a medal, with an inscription:
"For The Posting of Nonsense Above and Beyond the Call of Duty"
*