I've disciplined many different peoples children. As a paid employee and as an aunt / uncle. All before being a parent.

Hah. Do you want to bet on my parental status or not?

No, but I'd probably bet on your financial status at this point. It's pretty sad, isn't it?

This is by no means the norm. I won't claim you haven't done exactly this, but it's not common in the least bit. It's almost universal that disciplining children is left to the parents of that child, and not to others. When I say my mother doesn't discipline my child there is no real argument to be made there. Almost all grandparents are extremely lenient in regards to this, as the burden of discipline is left mostly to the parents. This doesn't mean there aren't rules that should be followed, but punishment is usually left to the parents and no one else.

Oh, by all means propose a bet there too!

You are welcome to walk around disciplining other people's children. Let me know how that works out for you.

I'll give you a hint : it won't work out well.

I have no need to. You are the one who brought up a wager, I declined. I have no reason to make any wager with you. We are having a discussion and I asked you a question that has direct impact on the discussion. You refuse to answer, which would indicate I am correct. Your basis of refusal to answer is absurd, which gives more weight to my assertion. Admittedly, I could be completely wrong, which is why I asked you directly. Even then, you seem to be a dishonest person in your arguments.

So be it.

How do you hold down a job with such poor reading skills? How did you possibly get from there to me "walking around disciplining other people's children"?

You said (and I even quoted it) that something didn't make sense to you until you had children. Not being able to comprehend things outside of your direct experience is a serious life limitation. You, in your infinite self-centeredness, assume that this limitation applies to everybody else too. I'll give you a hint: it doesn't.

I have a job, and I've held a job down for the last 25 years. I could even argue it's a "good" job.

The rest of your post is pretty stupid. There are perspectives you may not understand unless you experience them. This is not a revelation.

Wil. This is what you wrote. So by 'probably' you meant 'in no way shape or form'?

No. I am not absolute about it, but I'd say I'm >50% to be right. I have no desire to bet on it, and if you actually won the bet it would say much more about you than it would me.

It's pathetic that you even brought it up, honestly. If you are desperate for money, then it may make some sort of sense. I would never conduct myself in that manner otherwise.

wil,

Did your sociopolitical views change radically after your child was born?

Hah. The reason I offer the bet is to show how full of **** you are. You know your 'claims' are bull**** but you make them anyway because you need to deflect from the big pile of steaming crap you've written ITT.

I'll donate the winnings to charity. So if you're so confident in my sad financial state, propose a bet.

We could even do this. I'll agree to a bet as 'sad financial state' and let someone else decide if my exact details match that or not. That way I cant freeroll you on an exact number.

I never claimed you didn't have children. I ASKED if you had children.

I really just don't care. You can donate to whatever you wish or spend it on Twinkies. It matters nothing to me.

Again, I don't really care about your financial state, but your behavior would lean towards it being sub-optimal. I mostly said it as an insult. In my experience, only certain people act the way you are acting right now, but it is not absolute.

You've asked me questions and I've answered honestly. I've asked you questions and you've refused to answer. Which one of us is being sincere here?

So in the infinite loop of wil losing arguments, we come to another fork in the road:


1.) admit he is wrong

2.) try to discredit the person he's arguing with so he can go on believing that he is right, sadly only convincing himself


Hey wil, just because you can float through life and think the things you think without having negative life-harming consequences doesn't make you right or wrong. And working hard and being a yes-man for 25 years doesn't automatically qualify you to be smarter than others less fortunate. Just sayin': none of this **** you're spouting matters at all...you're just dodging the questions like I've seen in pretty much every thread I've read in here. No wonder you're notorious.

Wil, I guess the point about the bets is that you're such a big proponent of going off your feels and its pretty obvious your feels are just so blatantly wrong.

But at least you've learned from your experience with LG and won't talk yourself into making a dumb bet.

1 - I've admitted many times when I am wrong. 2 - a person's perspective means something.


If I'm floating through life and just getting lucky, then I must be the luckiest person in the world. Yes, I work hard, and no, I am not a yes-man. I believe that not being a yes-man is why I am where I am. Yes-man only get so far. Everyone knows this.

LG bet himself into being banned on his account. Yes, my bet with him was a stupid bet because he already knew the outcome, and I've admitted so. Again, for you to try to take advantage of that situation by offering me a bet that you know you've already won says MUCH more about you than me. I would never do that, as I'm not a POS like it seems you are.

I don't beg for money or "take candy from a baby". I have plenty of money and I don't feel the need to ever feel bad at night about how I came about it. Apparently for people like you that isn't the case.

I feel bad for you for conducting yourself in this manner. It's pathetic.

Hah. I think it's pathetic to make claims you won't stand behind. So there we have it!

No, we are left with something unsettled. You demand I answer your questions, and I comply. I asked you a direct question and you refused to answer on grounds of what, exactly? That I would use that information against you?

I have never had any history of ever using anyone's personal information against them. It's beneath me. I would never stoop so low to the level of Fly or LG. Not only because I care little about any of you, but because I have a certain level of self-respect. Make no mistake - I am not like the majority of you.

This really is one for the ages...

Because he's seen you time and time again discount any argument simply by asserting (wrongly) that someone's opinion is invalid once you've decided they do not qualify to be talking on the subject. It's a super weak move.

It's really not. I don't speak about what it's like to be in a warzone because I've never been in a warzone. I don't speak about what it's like to be a Muslim living in Saudi Arabia because I've never been a Muslim living in Saudi Arabia. I don't speak about what it's like to be a CEO because I've never been a CEO.

Perspective means something. That doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on a topic, but that opinion can be put into context.

Is this really that far-fetched?

Wil. This isn't really you asking a question.

It's you making a claim that you won't stand behind.

Define what a question mark represents, please.