|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On August 03 2016 05:05 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:00 Doodsmack wrote:On August 03 2016 04:54 oBlade wrote:On August 03 2016 04:38 Doodsmack wrote:On August 03 2016 04:20 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 03 2016 04:13 Doodsmack wrote:On August 03 2016 03:50 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 03 2016 03:19 Doodsmack wrote:On August 03 2016 02:59 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 03 2016 02:41 Doodsmack wrote:
[quote]
I realize it's temporary, but you really can't be that far removed from reality.
EDIT: and yes I know it's only a ban on immigration/travel. No less dangerous an idea, point still stands. I'm not removed from reality. You're just exaggerating your attacks when you decided to lash out against everyone who has decided to vote differently than you, which is a vast and diverse group of people voting for a variety of different reasons, and got called out on it. Yes I used hyperbole as we all do here and then you decided to get technical only address the hyperbole. Yes you're removed from reality, because history and Japanese internment and all that don't mean it's not a radical move. We've progressed as a country, and it is a radical move, based on a tribe mentality. Your view that electing its proponent is a good idea is dangerous. And this is just one of the reasons your views are dangerous. And I trust you are also committed to vetting and monitoring mentally ill white males in the US, due to their body count over the past couple years and the danger they pose to us. Or do you not want to implement any special danger-reducing measures in response to mass killings of civilians? I addressed your shitposting because it gets old coming in here and seeing you just flaming anyone who disagrees with you - all. the. time. Then you made a hyperbole to justify your shitposting and I called you out on it I'm not removed from reality. Hillary is proposing to take in 50,000 more Syrian refugees. We know ISIS is attempting to infiltrate refugee groups to commit acts of hatred and violence. I don't want 50,000 refugees in my country if the potential exists that one of them could end up murdering me or my friends or my family or just random innocent american civilians one day in the name of hatred or their God. And I actually do think mental health needs much more attention than it gets in politics - so once again you assume wrong facts about others. I don't think it should just be white males that better mental health though, rather everyone should have equal access to it independent of what their skin color is, which is another stupid as hell thing for you to say. You sure love your racial profiling for someone so set on affirming anyone who votes differently from what you agree with is racist. Not even a word from you on monitoring and vetting mentally ill white males - the group with the highest body count among the mentally ill. You just want better care for them? How about taking immediate danger-reducing measures by tracking and monitoring all of them? Or do you only want to take immediate measures on Muslims because of your tribe mentality? Guess you're fine going to movie theaters and other public places, but personally I think "the potential exists that one of them could end up murdering me or my friends or my family or just random innocent american civilians one day". I'm of the impression that better mental healthcare would result in the ability to identify and monitor those with mental health issues such that those displaying signs of posing threats to themselves or others would be taken into care to prevent this from happening. Got another other false accusations? Also, I was under the impression you see more mentally ill whites because you have more white people living in America. Do you have any statistical evidence to support the idea that they make up a disproportionate amount of shootings related to mental illness in terms of their proportion of the population? What's this about proportions? 1.6 billion what? We're concerned with body counts here, and addressing entire populations on the basis of "one" person potentially going on a rampage. Your plan for "better mental healthcare" would only address the subset of mentally ill white males currently getting care. We need to address entire population - past, present, and future potentially mentally ill white males - with immediate (not "hope it gets better down the road") measures in order to prevent civilian massacres. Anything else is just a tribe mentality. There aren't 1.6 billion people in America. But there are 1.6 billion Muslims. Yes, but that's not what proportionality means. If you have a house with 50 light bulbs and one of them burns out, and the factory also happens to have made 1.6 billion light bulbs, you can't then decree that the chance of one of your light bulbs burning out is a longer shot than the lottery.
So what can we decree about the chance of a Muslim visiting the US being a terrorist?
|
United States41983 Posts
I don't think people really care that much about birds. I mean if they killed literally all the birds and we were one wind turbine away from there being no birds left and McNuggets being taken off the menu etc then sure, don't build that turbine. But given we live in a society in which outside cats devastate bird populations I really don't think clean power is where we should draw the line. Especially given the alternative is also going to hurt the environment.
|
On August 03 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:
I'm suspicious of investments in "alternative energy" at present because the Obama administration has been quite bad about distinguishing scam artists from good companies worth subsidizing. And I trust his judgment better than Hillary's.
We subsidize fossil fuel like it's going out of style and no one seems to actually care too much about that. Subsidizing alternative energy is nothing more than evening the playing field. However people suddenly come out of the woodwork and have an opinion when it comes time to give them the same breaks we give the old crappy stuff.
|
On August 03 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:
I'm suspicious of investments in "alternative energy" at present because the Obama administration has been quite bad about distinguishing scam artists from good companies worth subsidizing. And I trust his judgment better than Hillary's.
The early politicization of climate change is a problem because the government is proving totally inept at spending money on anything related to it.
|
On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin
you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose.
|
On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose.
Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On August 03 2016 05:18 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose. Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy.
not a trap really; since I wasn't hurt/injured in any way by it. I recommend marking more clearly your intent, because in your case people are not likely to give the benefit of the doubt, and vagueness is likely to be held against you, justified or not.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On August 03 2016 05:17 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:
I'm suspicious of investments in "alternative energy" at present because the Obama administration has been quite bad about distinguishing scam artists from good companies worth subsidizing. And I trust his judgment better than Hillary's. We subsidize fossil fuel like it's going out of style and no one seems to actually care too much about that. Subsidizing alternative energy is nothing more than evening the playing field. However people suddenly come out of the woodwork and have an opinion when it comes time to give them the same breaks we give the old crappy stuff.
As far as I've read the fossil fuel subsidies are more cost efficient in terms of energy per dollar spent. So that's at least some justification for it.
Not that I'm against subsidies for renewals - it's just that there needs to be a better effort to distinguish charlatans with impractical ideas who just want government money from real potentially viable renewable projects. The former seems to be gaining an unacceptably high amount of the subsidy money and undermining the justification for funding renewables in the first place.
|
On August 03 2016 05:21 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:18 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose. Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy. not a trap really; since I wasn't hurt/injured in any way by it. I recommend marking more clearly your intent, because in your case people are not likely to give the benefit of the doubt, and vagueness is likely to be held against you, justified or not.
Better luck next time zle "im totally a moderate" fin, don't be so hasty next time!
|
On August 03 2016 05:17 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:
I'm suspicious of investments in "alternative energy" at present because the Obama administration has been quite bad about distinguishing scam artists from good companies worth subsidizing. And I trust his judgment better than Hillary's. We subsidize fossil fuel like it's going out of style and no one seems to actually care too much about that. Subsidizing alternative energy is nothing more than evening the playing field. However people suddenly come out of the woodwork and have an opinion when it comes time to give them the same breaks we give the old crappy stuff.
The power company is fighting tooth and nail with the solar and wind power providers in my state right now, because having a state backed monopoly isn’t good enough apparently. But I am on my forth letter to them to cut down and trim the dying trees on our street so we don’t have a massive power outage again. They were already fined by the state once for failing to care for the utility lines.
People argue new stuff might be bad, but the current stuff we have is shit.
|
On August 03 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:
I'm suspicious of investments in "alternative energy" at present because the Obama administration has been quite bad about distinguishing scam artists from good companies worth subsidizing. And I trust his judgment better than Hillary's.
I'm suspicious of people being suspicious because Mitt Romney called Tesla a failure in 2012 while saying something similar to what you're saying now.
|
On August 03 2016 05:22 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:21 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:18 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose. Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy. not a trap really; since I wasn't hurt/injured in any way by it. I recommend marking more clearly your intent, because in your case people are not likely to give the benefit of the doubt, and vagueness is likely to be held against you, justified or not. Better luck next time zle "im totally a moderate" fin, don't be so hasty next time!
and how is your current line of statements meant to be constructive?
|
On August 03 2016 05:23 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:22 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:21 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:18 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose. Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy. not a trap really; since I wasn't hurt/injured in any way by it. I recommend marking more clearly your intent, because in your case people are not likely to give the benefit of the doubt, and vagueness is likely to be held against you, justified or not. Better luck next time zle "im totally a moderate" fin, don't be so hasty next time! and how is your current line of statements meant to be constructive?
How was your attack on me for posting a funny donald trump quote constructive?
Isn't this the game you wanted to play
|
On August 03 2016 05:22 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:21 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:18 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose. Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy. not a trap really; since I wasn't hurt/injured in any way by it. I recommend marking more clearly your intent, because in your case people are not likely to give the benefit of the doubt, and vagueness is likely to be held against you, justified or not. Better luck next time zle "im totally a moderate" fin, don't be so hasty next time!
im not your mom/mod or whatever, but i recommend that after coming back from a ban you dont start off by being a massive dick?
|
On August 03 2016 05:22 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:17 OuchyDathurts wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:
I'm suspicious of investments in "alternative energy" at present because the Obama administration has been quite bad about distinguishing scam artists from good companies worth subsidizing. And I trust his judgment better than Hillary's. We subsidize fossil fuel like it's going out of style and no one seems to actually care too much about that. Subsidizing alternative energy is nothing more than evening the playing field. However people suddenly come out of the woodwork and have an opinion when it comes time to give them the same breaks we give the old crappy stuff. As far as I've read the fossil fuel subsidies are more cost efficient in terms of energy per dollar spent. So that's at least some justification for it. Not that I'm against subsidies for renewals - it's just that there needs to be a better effort to distinguish charlatans with impractical ideas who just want government money from real potentially viable renewable projects. The former seems to be gaining an unacceptably high amount of the subsidy money and undermining the justification for funding renewables in the first place.
what data source are you using for the unacceptably high level of charlatans getting it?
how does that compare with typical failure rates in such industries, and in general?
how successful are the successes?
how high a rate is unacceptable? There's always some issues after all.
|
Canada11278 Posts
On August 03 2016 02:04 Thaniri wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 00:24 MCWhiteHaze wrote:
You know what the biggest lie people fall into is? This statement right:
"I have to vote for the lesser of the two evils"
What? No you don't... No one holds a gun to your head and says you must vote for Hillary or Donald. That doesn't happen. You can vote for whoever you want, or not vote at all. I personally don't vote because I don't believe in how politics works and/or voting for anyone to me is a waste of time. I believe reform needs to happen on a personal social level before it will happen at the top.
Just my beliefs and I catch a lot of flack for them, oh well.
I get so sick of the presidential season...Family members arguing and getting mad at each other for the most ridiculous of reasons especially when we get such a jaded view and report. We end up arguing about things that aren't even true lol. Stupid.
God help us all. Amen.
In the Canadian parliamentary system there are 5 parties that regularly win seats each election. That doesn't happen if people only think about tory and liberal perspectives. I've seen the game theory post on why it is rational to vote for the lesser evil in an election, but one election alone probably won't fix the system. What was that quote about old men planting trees they will never enjoy the shade under? Do that.
We do have FPTP as well and I think it's only pre-1920's that we haven't had at least 3 parties if not 4 or 5 elected to parliament. Now, we also have an independent commission that divides the electoral boundaries- so I don't know how much the ability of the States to legally gerrymander effects things compared to up here. Even given that, I still don't see how third parties couldn't sweep certain regions at the congressional or senate level (presidential is almost impossible because it is winner takes the one and only spot.)
Perhaps for all the states rights ballyhoo, party loyalty is far stronger than regional loyalty. Because it seems impossible that something like the Reform Party that swept the West could spring up and throw the bums out- or the Orange wave in Quebec, or if we go further back, the Progressives sweeping the Prairies. Like, there's no midwest revolt or Texas sending a message to Washington that 'Texas wants in" (Reform tagline: The West wants in).
Dunno- legal gerrymandering? party loyalty trumps regionalism? Both? Something else? We certainly have far stricter controls of money in politics. Everything seems hyper political in the Right Left divide. Even things like who gets on the Supreme Court is highly political- often described in apocalyptic terms. I'm not sure that our Supreme Court appointments have ever been a serious election consideration. Perhaps with the stakes seemingly lower, we feel a greater freedom to vote in 50 members of a third party that has no hope of governing.
|
On August 03 2016 05:25 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:22 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:21 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:18 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose. Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy. not a trap really; since I wasn't hurt/injured in any way by it. I recommend marking more clearly your intent, because in your case people are not likely to give the benefit of the doubt, and vagueness is likely to be held against you, justified or not. Better luck next time zle "im totally a moderate" fin, don't be so hasty next time! im not your mom/mod or whatever, but i recommend that after coming back from a ban you dont start off by being a massive dick?
Posting an article is not being a massive dick. Personally insulting some one on the other hand like zlefin did, is.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On August 03 2016 05:23 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:
I'm suspicious of investments in "alternative energy" at present because the Obama administration has been quite bad about distinguishing scam artists from good companies worth subsidizing. And I trust his judgment better than Hillary's. I'm suspicious of people being suspicious because Mitt Romney called Tesla a failure in 2012 while saying something similar to what you're saying now.
Get back to me when Tesla starts making a profit. I'll believe the company is successful when I see it. Right now it is merely surviving and riding an obscene hype train of government + investor money.
|
On August 03 2016 05:25 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:23 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:22 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:21 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:18 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose. Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy. not a trap really; since I wasn't hurt/injured in any way by it. I recommend marking more clearly your intent, because in your case people are not likely to give the benefit of the doubt, and vagueness is likely to be held against you, justified or not. Better luck next time zle "im totally a moderate" fin, don't be so hasty next time! and how is your current line of statements meant to be constructive? How was your attack on me for posting a funny donald trump quote constructive? Isn't this the game you wanted to play
I didn't strongly attack you, it was at most a mild attack; and it also included advice, seeking understanding on why you'd use such a thing; and I pointed out several flaws in the statement made by a presidential candidate; that's clearly at least somewhat constructive.
Whereas you seem to have gone with the definition of trolling, making a statement to provoke a rise out of people and then laugh at their responses. I advise against doing things like that, or that seem like that, or you're likely to end up banned again.
|
On August 03 2016 05:29 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2016 05:25 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:23 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:22 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:21 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:18 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:17 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:13 VayneAuthority wrote:On August 03 2016 05:10 zlefin wrote:On August 03 2016 05:06 VayneAuthority wrote:“And honestly, it’s not working so good. I know a lot about solar. I love solar. But the payback is what, 18 years? Oh great, let me do it. Eighteen years,” he said, turning to wind power. “The wind kills all your birds. All your birds, killed. You know, the environmentalists never talk about that.” thehill.comluckily I am back from my ban to talk about the real issues then why open up with a quote of extreme ignorance? so we can mock it's stupidity? Wind doesn't kill all the birds, it only kills some; and the environmentalists complain about that ALL the time. So it's just an example of idiocy and not knowing anything about the topic to claim otherwise. you realize im mocking the quote? Wew Lad I was wondering which hardcore lefty would be the first to bait on this, looks like you get the gold medal zlefin you weren't mocking the quote at all; you brought it up for an unknown purpose. Looks like you were just looking for a fight and happened to fall into a trap, Unlucky my boy. not a trap really; since I wasn't hurt/injured in any way by it. I recommend marking more clearly your intent, because in your case people are not likely to give the benefit of the doubt, and vagueness is likely to be held against you, justified or not. Better luck next time zle "im totally a moderate" fin, don't be so hasty next time! and how is your current line of statements meant to be constructive? How was your attack on me for posting a funny donald trump quote constructive? Isn't this the game you wanted to play I didn't strongly attack you, it was at most a mild attack; and it also included advice, seeking understanding on why you'd use such a thing; and I pointed out several flaws in the statement made by a presidential candidate; that's clearly at least somewhat constructive. Whereas you seem to have gone with the definition of trolling, making a statement to provoke a rise out of people and then laugh at their responses. I advise against doing things like that, or that seem like that, or you're likely to end up banned again.
last I checked personal insults are also bannable, guess you should stop doing that  calling me a "stupid, ignorant, idiot" 3 times in a small paragraph is not a "mild insult"
I didn't try to get a rise out of anyone, I posted something you would actually find favorable and you chose to personally insult me instead. Shows how badly you are looking for confrontation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
