- Time
- Post link
Bingowings said:
Your first post was a bit of a red flag
Ric Olie would be proud of you.
Star Wars Episode XXX: Erica Strikes Back
If you want Nice, go to France
The ot.com "If I do this again on the forum, please someone stab me in the eye with an icepick" Thread (Also: The twooffour Discussion Thread) — Page 7
- Time
- Post link
TV's Frink said:
Bingowings said:
Your first post was a bit of a red flag
Ric Olie would be proud of you.
I don't think so... He would be more likely to say, "Your first post was the beginning of this thread".
- Time
- Post link
I miss Ric Olie.
This thread is now about Ric Olie.
- Time
- Post link
twooffour said:
Davnes007 said:
twooffour said:
Davnes007 said:
twooffour said:
...you have to be making sense on the... internet...That's a pretty high ideal.
...Especially considering you haven't met that 'ideal' yourself.
I may be wrong on occasion... :D
How does any of this apply to what I said?
...
I was referring to what others did, not you ;)
Punchline appreciated.
Alright. :)
But in the future, when referring to others, please quote the persons to which you are referring.
Thanks,
-Dave & Erica.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
[EDIT] Forget it...
- Time
- Post link
Warbler said:
How bout you take a tardis, go back to the 70's and tell Muhammad Ali to his face, that his religion is ridiculous and stupid.
Hmmm, this little tidbit got me day dreaming about what I'd do if I had a Tardis. You know, I think the Doctor has it right, if I had a Tardis I'd waste no time finding an attractive, adventurous young women to take backwards and forwards through time with me to wherever sounded the most fun that day.
- Time
- Post link
Bingowings said:
Pat Condell is a Vegetarian.
You mean, he steals the food from my food??? Get the forks and torches!
- Time
- Post link
You may need this health advice Frink.
...
*stabs Frink in the eye multiple times with virtual icepick*
- Time
- Post link
*virtual ouch*
- Time
- Post link
TV's Frink said:
*virtual ouch*
*actual virtual lol*
Star Wars Episode XXX: Erica Strikes Back
If you want Nice, go to France
- Time
- Post link
TK-949 said: Get the forks and torches!
Are you going to have a midnight feast?
- Time
- Post link
... where the vampires peass?
- Time
- Post link
..give vampires peass a chanse.
- Time
- Post link
one was a salted vampire...
- Time
- Post link
Bingowings said:
TK-949 said: Get the forks and torches!
Are you going to have a midnight feast?
Oh, my bad, I meant pitchforks.
...but if eating flesh would be prohibited, I'd eat vegetarians.
- Time
- Post link
twooffour said:
one was a salted vampire...
<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>
- Time
- Post link
Whatthehellisthatkillitwithfire.
- Time
- Post link
TV's Frink said:
Whatthehellisthatkillitwithfire.
<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>
- Time
- Post link
Fuck, I'm doing it again. Icepick, please.
- Time
- Post link
TV's Frink said:
Fuck, I'm doing it again. Icepic, please.
- Time
- Post link
I see what you edited there.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
twooffour said:
RedFive said:
twooffour said:
I haven't read the original paper, but from the way it's described, it's a poor one.
A study that doesn't take any of that into account and attempts to make a sweeping statement based on a few students reading a few books? Do not want.A long-winded reply that starts out by admitting the poster didn't even read the (relatively short) original article? Do not want.
The ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER, not the article, you CLOWN.
Here's the thing. I'm gonna bite, but just this one time.
Twooffour, you are correct, i misunderstood your post. OK?
In my defense, the link in the OP said NOTHING about a research paper, nor did it link to any additional research. There was no reason for you to say you "didn't read the paper", because no one read the paper. There is no paper, unless you did further research on the story and found one. Do you see how this could be confusing? (I'm sure you don't)
But let's ignore all that, even. Let's say I called you out on something you didn't do and made a total ass of myself, for arguments sake. The problem I, and everyone else, has with you is this:
The ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER, not the article, you CLOWN.
There is no need for that at all. It's childish. It's idiotic.
This is why no one has respect for your opinions, most everyone is ignoring you, and Frink replies to your posts with funny gif's.
I hope you understand, but really, I don't give a shit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-O_l4ZP8dyQ&feature=player_detailpage#t=3s
- Time
- Post link
From now on I think I'll refer to 2/4 as "Uncle Fucker."
- Time
- Post link
Thread title updated.
- Time
- Post link
The psychologists end the paper (forthcoming in Psychological Science) by wondering if the pleasure of spoiled surprises might extend beyond fiction
I guess I've missed the part where it said "forthcoming", but then again, it may have been published in some preliminary form, and I thought before missing some link or reference and claiming how the idiots didn't include any references, making myself look like a complete buffoon, I'd just say "I'm only proceeding from the article" as a disclaimer.
May have been superfluous, but I did say "original paper" so I don't see how that's confusing.
There is no need for that at all. It's childish. It's idiotic.
Well I would've gladly taken some insults and ridicule for a crude mistake like that.
Last time when Frink posted about some LOST edit and I missed the part where he said he didn't write it, people were acting pretty fucking abusive about it, calling me a moron and posting pictures of bananas, but you didn't see me whine about it or deny my mistake because that (as soon as I realized it, that is) now did you?
Because it was completely justified.
Sometimes you just have to take it, laugh at your mistakes, and not allow the "act cocky and go into denial if abused" defense mechanism to take over. It simply doesn't help.