Such a terrible complaint, which proves why I say you are a terrible critic.

Why do you make it so easy to be criticized when you could avoid it by improving the accuracy and substance of your criticisms?

How can someone complaining about having to wade through a wall of your posts be terrible? It's a valid complaint.

It may demonstrate why you say what you say it doesn't prove it.

You're impervious to both substance and accuracy. You're the boxer who spends 12 rounds getting battered only to run round the ring with your hands aloft at the final bell.

So far you show skill at making assertions that contain exaggerations, but you can have no certain idea what I am and am not impervious too. So you lack accuracy and substance in your criticism here.

You really cripple yourself acting like you have more knowledge about me than my own self-knowledge.

I would increase your observations skills and lay off the exaggeration to improve accuracy. Study and learn to increase substance.

Where is the exaggeration, this is just an assertion on your part. I'm also not claiming knowledge about you, what I am claiming is that your claims regarding your posts differ from pretty much everyone else. Two different posters in two different threads made pretty much the same claim about your claims to victory being largely unfounded. This isn't a coincidence.

Humans are unique individuals, so one being different from one or a group is trivial; as a stand alone thought.

You are trying an appeal to popularity, which really has a diminishing return on substance and accuracy as the crowd gets it wrong the same as individuals. So verification is a very important to add substance.

Another way to look at is like the difference between counting votes and reading why people voted.

Plus this PU crowd is notorious for gossip and ad hominems. The odds two or more people would repeat the same bullcrap in this forum are probably pretty high.

It's not an appeal to popularity though the wisdom of crowds remains a useful heuristic it is merely to point out that I am not the only person who considers that you declare victory without warrant. As for verification, well there's an example of you doing this against Low Key in the post that initiated this exchange.

You may consider my perspective irrelevant, I'll admit I've not done much to give you reason not to, but TheDuker is someone who's demonstrated a reasonable grasp of these forums. Add to that kerowo also challenged your declaration of Low Key's criticism invalid and there should be enough to give you pause for thought. It won't, you immunise yourself from criticism by engaging in the very ad hominems you accuse others of.

Dered I think you are trying to fill your opinion with something and I wish you luck navigating the fiction available to choose from that has been made by both the crowd and "authorities".

If you repeat fiction about a person in public, it is possible you will find the record corrected. If you argue your fiction is fact, you better argue well and hope for plenty of suckers in the audience.

Regards,

Here we go again on our own.
Going down the only road we've ever known.
Like 2 drifters, we were born to walk alone.

-Whitesnake

3 posts back to back in 6 minutes

I'm going to go with spank over steelhouse in that thread.

Can we exile spank to regular politics, or is his ignorant thread spamming too annoying for even people who agree with him on 99.9% of things?

steelhouse is way more tolerable than spank and it isn't even close. They basically do the same thing but at least steelhouse puts all of his incoherent thoughts into a few posts.

Anyone can confirm that spank = missiledog? Has to be the same dude right? I guess MD wasn't quite as annoying/spammy as spank but the tactics were/are quite similar.

pretty sure stank was exiled from P for being terrible

You have fascinating demands and conspiracy theories.