Sociopath Community

Inquirer said:

That wasn't the main argument though so your "joke" fell pretty flat. You don't feel embarrassed that you get simple things like the nationality of MissC wrong or automagically assume anyone's far-fetched claims of Swedish heritage?

Inquirer, don't be a child and learn to take a joke. Arguing that not knowing people's nationality makes someone dumb is like trying to argue that Inquirer is an SC mastermind when he can't stick to making consistent arguments. Ironically, by demonstrating you're not very sharp, you're disproving my point. Just not in the way I was expecting.

You demand proof of people's nationalities to the point of having a photo of them with a national flag. And that's fine, you can make that stance, that e.g. having a "Swedish kickboxer" reputation for 5+ years, never denying it, or speaking Swedish, is not enough to claim someone is Swedish. It's fine to ask for evidence.

But do you realize why, when you back up on that stance and claim that I am fake Sensy (which is clearly you) or that MissC is Canadian, your stance becomes ridiculous?

To put it in simpler terms: You have to be at the very least logically consistent.

Legga said: 

Inquirer, don't be a child and learn to take a joke. Arguing that not knowing people's nationality makes someone dumb is like trying to argue that Inquirer is an SC mastermind when he can't stick to making consistent arguments. Ironically, by demonstrating you're not very sharp, you're disproving my point. Just not in the way I was expecting.

What isn't a consistent argument? Most people here know the nationality of other regulars, you just don't because you haven't bothered to actually find out.

You demand proof of people's nationalities to the point of having a photo of them with a national flag. And that's fine, you can make that stance, that e.g. having a "Swedish kickboxer" reputation for 5+ years, never denying it, or speaking Swedish, is not enough to claim someone is Swedish. It's fine to ask for evidence.

I've never demanded proof like that, which you know. If someone consistently says they're Swedish or speaks/writes Swedish then I consider that good enough evidence. Your problem is that neither User, MissC or Ed has done any of that.

But do you realize why, when you back up on that stance and claim that I am fake Sensy (which is clearly you) or that MissC is Canadian, your stance becomes ridiculous?

To put it in simpler terms: You have to be at the very least logically consistent.

What's ridiculous is someone with very little actual knowledge of SC talking about things they clearly know nothing about. Come on, I want to be challenged here, not just mindlessly trolled.

By the way, if you want to know the full list of Swedish members (past and present) you need only ask.

Inquirer said:

What isn't a consistent argument?

 

Most people here know the nationality of other regulars, you just don't because you haven't bothered to actually find out.

You demand proof of people's nationalities to the point of having a photo of them with a national flag. And that's fine, you can make that stance, that e.g. having a "Swedish kickboxer" reputation for 5+ years, never denying it, or speaking Swedish, is not enough to claim someone is Swedish. It's fine to ask for evidence.

I've never demanded proof like that, which you know. If someone consistently says they're Swedish or speaks/writes Swedish then I consider that good enough evidence. Your problem is that neither User, MissC or Ed has done any of that.

But do you realize why, when you back up on that stance and claim that I am fake Sensy (which is clearly you) or that MissC is Canadian, your stance becomes ridiculous?

To put it in simpler terms: You have to be at the very least logically consistent.

What's ridiculous is someone with very little actual knowledge of SC talking about things they clearly know nothing about. Come on, I want to be challenged here, not just mindlessly trolled.

You say my `troll` was a failure, and tell me to try harder. Then you whine you don't like it. Here we are with Inquirer caught pants-down in literally his worst nightmare -- an untenable position in a debate.

Turncoat is a genius, I can't believe how spot-on he was in saying that you are insecure about looking stupid. I never realized that until he actually spelled it out. You're just like that fucking Oscar character from The Office:

And oh no no, there's no way I'm letting you off the hook that easy, Inquirer. You're going to have to admit you made a ridiculously stupid argumentation mistake in contradicting your own stance, demanding evidence and then backing up on that stance when you make your own claims. I see this really fucking eggs you, enough to have you stay up 4 AM Swedish time on working day to reply. So I'm going to milk it for all its worth.

Let's hear it then Inquirer.

Inquirer said: 

Legga said: 

Inquirer, don't be a child and learn to take a joke. Arguing that not knowing people's nationality makes someone dumb is like trying to argue that Inquirer is an SC mastermind when he can't stick to making consistent arguments. Ironically, by demonstrating you're not very sharp, you're disproving my point. Just not in the way I was expecting.

What isn't a consistent argument? Most people here know the nationality of other regulars, you just don't because you haven't bothered to actually find out.

You demand proof of people's nationalities to the point of having a photo of them with a national flag. And that's fine, you can make that stance, that e.g. having a "Swedish kickboxer" reputation for 5+ years, never denying it, or speaking Swedish, is not enough to claim someone is Swedish. It's fine to ask for evidence.

I've never demanded proof like that, which you know. If someone consistently says they're Swedish or speaks/writes Swedish then I consider that good enough evidence. Your problem is that neither User, MissC or Ed has done any of that.

But do you realize why, when you back up on that stance and claim that I am fake Sensy (which is clearly you) or that MissC is Canadian, your stance becomes ridiculous?

To put it in simpler terms: You have to be at the very least logically consistent.

What's ridiculous is someone with very little actual knowledge of SC talking about things they clearly know nothing about. Come on, I want to be challenged here, not just mindlessly trolled.

  ikr. ridiculous and very little challenge

Legga said: 

I'm quite certain MissC is Swedish too.

 From context in other's comments i was under the impression Inq and MissC were married irl, but maybe that was just a troll like Tryp and Seerx being married...

PalePeach said:

 From context in other's comments i was under the impression Inq and MissC were married irl, but maybe that was just a troll like Tryp and Seerx being married...

I wouldn't be surprised if that was the official story by Inq :D

She will likely be here shortly.

Legga said: 

You say my `troll` was a failure, and tell me to try harder. Then you whine you don't like it. Here we are with Inquirer caught pants-down in literally his worst nightmare -- an untenable position in a debate.

Where's the contradiction? I think your attempt at trolling is lame and I'm disappointed by that.

Turncoat is a genius, I can't believe how spot-on he was in saying that you are insecure about looking stupid. I never realized that until he actually spelled it out.

Good thing we have people like you who are clearly not afraid of looking stupid. You're the yin to my yang. :p

And oh no no, there's no way I'm letting you off the hook that easy, Inquirer. You're going to have to admit you made a ridiculously stupid argumentation mistake in contradicting your own stance, demanding evidence and then backing up on that stance when you make your own claims. I see this really fucking eggs you, enough to have you stay up 4 AM Swedish time on working day to reply. So I'm going to milk it for all its worth.

Let's hear it then Inquirer.

Again, I don't even understand what the "contradiction" is. For example, you claim Ed has a reputation for being a "Swedish kickboxer" when that's not true. Then, when I point it out, you make stuff up about how I've demanded you give me a pic of him with the Swedish flag (or the equivalent), which is absurd. I just wish you could do a rudimentary fact-check on the things you claim. Is that too much to ask?

Why would I be "egged" when you're so desperate you have to resort to lying about post times and upvote your own post with socks?

PalePeach said: 

Legga said: 

I'm quite certain MissC is Swedish too.

 From context in other's comments i was under the impression Inq and MissC were married irl, but maybe that was just a troll like Tryp and Seerx being married...

Well, I haven't seen any comments like that but I wouldn't be surprised if she's made jokes about it.

Heck, for a while in my chat, that is international, I have ONE American. The rest were Canadians and Swedes. That it happens at times is not that weird, because both Canada and Sweden have a high use of computers, where USA has gone to using phones instead of computers and mainly moved to Facebook and Twitter. Also the infrastructure of the web in Sweden always have been one of the best, which showed Sweden the Interwebz long before they were in reach for others. Swedes still use more hours per day being online. When technology mix in with the Swedish culture, things like this happen. We need to be social but we never talk to people, like people in a checkout line or our neighbors. We use the Internet to keep human contact.

I'm on the fence with Legga. I can't decide if he is batshit crazy or if this is his way of having fun. Seriously, no one can be this obsessed.

And he is lying. HE pushed the Skype call. When we were in Skype and my phone was stable, HE delayed for 20 minutes!!! For what reason? And of course he used the loophole that he had not promised to talk on Skype, but anyone would have just counted on it. So he acted against ethics.

I'm not sure who Inky is, except from Inky himself. I think we will never even have a vague idea, because that guy is smart. And careful. If he is someone else, I think he would be an American. (Right Inky?) THERE IS NO REASON WHY HIS PUPPETS MUST BE SWEDISH.

You can change your way of writing - to a point I'm sorry but how Inky and I talk on here is totally different. I can see the differences with ease. And I also admit he is better at English, which is due to him being younger. I wasn't victim of American cultural imperialism when I was a kid. That came in his childhood. He was immersed in the American English language. Also I suspect, despite what he says, that he spent time in the States.

We have proved to be two separate people. If I had enjoyed this more, I would have toyed with it, but I never did, even if I had the lnquirer (Lnquirer) puppet.

Still Legga hasn't proven anything. We don't actually know this is the real Legga. If you are the real Legga, tell me what question you asked me on Skype.