Page 3 of 86 < 1 2 3 4 5 ... 85 86 >
Topic Options
#8504 - 03/13/08 06:30 PM Re: Byrne Fund
Paul W. Sondersted, Jr. Online   sleepy
Member

Registered: 07/22/01
Posts: 4593
Loc: Sparks, Nevada, United States
Quote:
Originally posted by Joe Lee:
Quote:
Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:
That's just very sad & shows very limited thinking on your parts...
More cynical than limited, I should think.

As far as there being "more to life," my take on a lot of people here is that we all, while in the midst of doing more important things like work, take a few minutes here and there, to chime in here and see what's going on, try and make someone laugh with a post or two, then we get back to what it was we were doing.

You seem pretty obsessed with more or less one topic.
More like focused than obsessed, I should think.

And I agree about your assessment regarding certain other comicon posters. Some can be quite humorous, in fact. Some I laugh with & some I laugh at.

Top
#8505 - 03/13/08 06:51 PM Re: Byrne Fund
Peter Urkowitz Offline
Member

Registered: 08/28/00
Posts: 3231
Loc: Salem, MA, USA
Quote:
Originally posted by John Edward Green:
I have a great idea!

Let's create a "Byrne Fund". As part of our fund raising we can have a yearly Byrne Fund event where we dress up as John Byrne and heckle disabled people - "So you think you're a hero, eh? Pussy!!!". As well, we could set up a fund raising booth where you can take your pictures with a carboard cut out of Byrne .
I have a better idea. How about, every time somebody starts a new Byrne thread, or bumps a years-old Byrne thread like this one, they have to put a nickel in the jar on the counter? That would raise a lot more, a lot faster.

OK, here's my 5 cents. *clink* smile

Top
#8506 - 03/14/08 01:34 PM Re: Byrne Fund
stanleylieber Offline
Member

Registered: 02/13/07
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally posted by Shoegaze99:
Quote:
Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:
broaden your horizons.
I agree .
That's an impressive list.

Top
#8507 - 03/14/08 08:18 PM Re: Byrne Fund
Paul W. Sondersted, Jr. Online   sleepy
Member

Registered: 07/22/01
Posts: 4593
Loc: Sparks, Nevada, United States
WARNING! The words "post", "poster" & "posted" are driven into the ground in this, er, post.

Ya know, I followed that link & AT FIRST I thought you guys may have had a point. I noticed that February 26 (it was a Tuesday, so I was not working) APPEARED to be a busy posting day for me here at comicon, so I decided (all by myself!) to do a little comparison shopping just for that particular day.

Keep in mind (TRY!) that I'm fully aware of my focus HERE at comicon, so belabor THAT point if you must...

I posted 20 times over the course of a 12 hour period, the busiest time being between 5:30 & 6:00 PM in which I posted 6 times in that half hour.

20 times. That's quite a bit, but not the winning number for that day in the same thread.

Another poster posted 25 times within a less than 11 hour time frame.

Yet another poster posted 14 times within a little over an hour.

4th place goes to another poster who posted 11 times within a little over a 9 hour time period.

And 5th places goes to another poster who posted 10 times within a near 12 hour time frame.

There were a total of 108 posts within a 14 hour period (the first post for that day was posted at 9:41 AM & the last post was posted at 11:47 PM).

What's my point here? There are several, but I'll just stick with the one that floats closest to the surface...

You guys like to point out that I post a "lot" about a certain subject (and I'm not arguing that), but it's funny to note that I'm not the only one & I'm not the one who posts the most.

L! O! L!

Top
#8508 - 03/15/08 09:23 AM Re: Byrne Fund
IvanJim Offline
Member

Registered: 06/16/01
Posts: 2865
Loc: Los Angeles
While you may not be the busiest poster on the boards, you're certainly a member of the prolific posters club.

The distinction you seem to carry is in the entwined activities of being one of the most obsessive of posters, the one exhibiting one of the strongest degrees of denial, and one seemingly with the least amount of awareness about how thoroughly you've exposed yourself.

Good luck with convincing anyone other than yourself of anything at all. I don't think that it's within your skill set but good luck with it anyway.

Top
#8509 - 03/15/08 12:16 PM Re: Byrne Fund
Paul W. Sondersted, Jr. Online   sleepy
Member

Registered: 07/22/01
Posts: 4593
Loc: Sparks, Nevada, United States
Not obsessive, IvanJim, focused. It may very well be a narrow focus, but there's nothing obsessive at all...at least not from my end of things.

Deny? Exposed? You're really grasping.

Oh, and I'm certainly aware that trying to convince a detractor of anything fact-based is practically a lost cause, so no need for you to waste your sarcastic attempt at luck-wishing.

-----

Seriously, though, you don't have to dig into your bag of psycho-clap trap all over again. You & I both know it's a waste of time. I'm sure your fellow detractors are tired of the same old song & dance...& really, your theories & innuendos can never really be proven, so other than impressing fellow detractors, it's really, as I said, a waste of time.

Mind you, I'm fully aware (what? two times in one day?) that you cannot help yourself when it comes to the apparent need to "prove" yourself to your fellow detractors, so I'll not fault you (you're welcome!) for your lack of will-power. It's one of your more endearing traits! eek

Top
#8510 - 03/15/08 04:24 PM Re: Byrne Fund
IvanJim Offline
Member

Registered: 06/16/01
Posts: 2865
Loc: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:
Not obsessive, IvanJim, focused. It may very well be a narrow focus, but there's nothing obsessive at all...at least not from my end of things.
A look at your last fifty postings would argue for a mono-focus which is appropriately described as an obsession. If one were to look at your last 1,000 posts the argument would be considered proven and closed by any reasonable person.

The fact that you're either unwillingly or unable to recognize your own behaviors isn't in any way disproving this.

Quote:
Deny? Exposed? You're really grasping.
You can't quantify this, of course, anymore than you're able to explain in what ways you aren't exposed and in what ways denial doesn't apply to your denying what's been said.

As usual, all you can do is deny what's been said without ever showing any reason that your denial has any merit.

Quote:
Oh, and I'm certainly aware that trying to convince a detractor of anything fact-based is practically a lost cause, so no need for you to waste your sarcastic attempt at luck-wishing.
Paul, you've consistently stated that you have no interest in convincing anyone of anything, and I tend to think this is because you've consistently shown an inability to convince anyone of anything.

As such, my comments are really more about you than for you. It's not a matter of what I need or don't need to say, but what I choose to say. Therefore I choose to point out the obvious weaknesses in the way you post because it's fun to do from time to time, but thanks for telling me how you feel that I should post.


Quote:
Seriously, though, you don't have to dig into your bag of psycho-clap trap all over again. You & I both know it's a waste of time. I'm sure your fellow detractors are tired of the same old song & dance...& really, your theories & innuendos can never really be proven, so other than impressing fellow detractors, it's really, as I said, a waste of time.
Actually, Paul, what you've missed is the fact that my theories have been accepted by a number of people. I know this because people have posted and said so. Thus it's reasonable to contend that the time I spent writing them has a certain payoff in terms of conveying a message. From the responses that have been written when you've posted, I'd have to say that you're posting hasn't had any real reaction in the way that people think at all. Therefore it's reasonable to conclude that the person wasting time is the person who posts opinions that don't sway anyone's thinking. That'd be you.

Quote:
Mind you, I'm fully aware (what? two times in one day?) that you cannot help yourself when it comes to the apparent need to "prove" yourself to your fellow detractors, so I'll not fault you (you're welcome!) for your lack of will-power. It's one of your more endearing traits! eek
Now there you go again, slinging charges without any logic presented to back up what you've said. It's probably one of the reasons that you're so ineffective when it comes to trying to persuade anyone of the accuracy of your point of view.

The useful thing about you Paul, is that you may be incapable of learning but you still provide a learning experience. Thank you for that.

Top
#8511 - 03/15/08 06:21 PM Re: Byrne Fund
Paul W. Sondersted, Jr. Online   sleepy
Member

Registered: 07/22/01
Posts: 4593
Loc: Sparks, Nevada, United States
. I didn't wanna do it, but once again...YOU "force" my typing fingers...

Lather...Rinse...Repeat.

As the past has proven, you stick to your theories & believe them, even when logic SHOULD dictate otherwise.

You cater to others, as proven by your line above ("my theories have been accepted by a number of people. I know this because people have posted and said so.").
You then follow up using the word "reasonable" & in the context of the discussion, "reasonable" & the people you are referring to is oxymoronic.
Of course your theories have been accepted by people. What you fail to grasp (with a garbage can full of obtuseness...purposefully, of course) is that the vast majority (of a relative few) who agree with your theories are like-minded detractors whose ideas of being "reasonable" usually entail making use of exaggeration & out-and-out falsehood.
Face it, the vast majority (of the aforementioned relative few) of those who hoist you on their virtual shoulders are anonymous cowards with overactive imaginations & if you choose to continue to count on (and find comfort in) their "support", then you will only continue to make yourself look more & more foolish...if that's possible (not to your fellow detractors, of course).
So, continue to lob your ineffectual theories & innuendos, but also continue to ignore the fact that these lobs never make it past the net...unless you play in a detractors' court, a place in which you can pretend the world is flat & the moon is made of green cheese.

Top
#8512 - 03/15/08 08:02 PM Re: Byrne Fund
IvanJim Offline
Member

Registered: 06/16/01
Posts: 2865
Loc: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally posted by Paul W. Sondersted, Jr.:
. I didn't wanna do it, but once again...YOU "force" my typing fingers...
This indicates that you think I (and by extension, other folks at other times) hold responsibility for the actions you take. It's this avoidance of responsibility which might in large part be responsible for your well known problems with credit card irresponsibility.

Quote:
Lather...Rinse...Repeat.
This phrase means nothing to anyone but you and is indicative of your inability to clearly communicate anything other than insupportable surface banalities. Thank you for providing consistent examples of your lack of originality and clarity.

Quote:
As the past has proven, you stick to your theories & believe them, even when logic SHOULD dictate otherwise.-
Actually, Paul, this is a perfect example of why you're so inept in both communicating ideas and persuading other people of the "ideas" you espouse. The past has never proven what you contend, nor have you ever proven what you contend. You've alleged this before, but you've never ever provided any logic or examples to back up your supposition. As usual there's no reason to believe what you say beyond your words, and you've never shown any propensity or desire to back your words with any examples or logic.

Quote:
You cater to others, as proven by your line above ("my theories have been accepted by a number of people. I know this because people have posted and said so.").
What I'm doing is communicating with other people. I'm expressing my ideas, explaining how I came to my conclusions and listening to the feedback that other people provide after reading what I've written. For some reason you find this pattern of communication distasteful which explains why you seem to have such difficulties persuading anyone of the legitimacy of anything that you've written. It doesn't explain away your lack of perceptual skills but it does inform folks who read what you've written why you won't process any information that's directed towards you.
Quote:
You then follow up using the word "reasonable" & in the context of the discussion, "reasonable" & the people you are referring to is oxymoronic.
Of course your theories have been accepted by people. What you fail to grasp (with a garbage can full of obtuseness...purposefully, of course) is that the vast majority (of a relative few) who agree with your theories are like-minded detractors whose ideas of being "reasonable" usually entail making use of exaggeration & out-and-out falsehood.
You have a consistent habit of treating anyone who points out the deficiencies of your arguments as part of a cabal of conspirators who have chosen to detract from all that you feel is righteous and good. You use their membership in this group that you've created in your head to disqualify anything that's been said that you don't want to recognize. This suggests two possible scenarios;

1) You're a paranoid lunatic who has problems recognizing reality.


or

2) You're a man with sociopathic tendencies who will consistently argue something that you don't actually believe because you feel that this is somehow more palatable than recognizing when you've been proven both wrong and foolish.

Personally I've come to believe that the truth lies between the two, and you're actually a sociopathic and angry man who purposefully lets his personal issues interfere with his cognitive skills.
Quote:
Face it, the vast majority (of the aforementioned relative few) of those who hoist you on their virtual shoulders are anonymous cowards with overactive imaginations & if you choose to continue to count on (and find comfort in) their "support", then you will only continue to make yourself look more & more foolish...if that's possible (not to your fellow detractors, of course).
If someone else started talking about my being raised on "virtual shoulders" due to some folks agreeing with what I've written, I'd say that they were using distortion and hyperbole. When you say it, I think it's more indicative of a fixed delusional system that you've created to justify to yourself your inability to effectively make a case for what you believe.

In that you call folks cowards because they disagree with what you've said, you're providing a further example of your desire to disqualify the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you by any means necessary. You may be unpleasant and vituperous, but you're still consistently ineffective in supporting your accusations.
Quote:
So, continue to lob your ineffectual theories & innuendos, but also continue to ignore the fact that these lobs never make it past the net...unless you play in a detractors' court, a place in which you can pretend the world is flat & the moon is made of green cheese.
Considering that the venue that you metaphorically speak of is Comicon where you've chosen to play, and considering that those who are in a position to call the match have ruled your lobs, volleys and serves to be consistently ineffective and that you haven't ever earned a qualifying point in any match, I'd say that you were being typically myopic in the way you've chosen to score the match. You've had over 2200 serves and you still haven't convinced anyone other than yourself that you've scored any points.

In my estimation that qualifies you as only one thing;

a persistent loser.


(and now you can continue to whine and protest that you're really the winner, because the whole arena is filled with detractors. You certainly wouldn't want reality to intrude at this late stage in the game.)

Top
#8513 - 03/15/08 09:17 PM Re: Byrne Fund
Paul W. Sondersted, Jr. Online   sleepy
Member

Registered: 07/22/01
Posts: 4593
Loc: Sparks, Nevada, United States
Now you can't go using my material & expect to be taken seriously, do you? Oh, wait!

You are Ay-mazingly delusional...as usual.

And you are the LAST "person" to bring up the word "originality", which is why I consistently "bug" you with the phrase, "Lather...Rinse...Repeat".

Same old song & dance routine from you! Pathetic to me, but I'm sure a Tony Award winning performance to your fellow detractors.


Top
Page 3 of 86 < 1 2 3 4 5 ... 85 86 >


Moderator:  Rick Veitch, Steve Conley