Who is your favourite troll?

[Scuba]

Scuba - the Socrates of scuba

What an honor!.... To be compared to one of the great thinkers of Western Civilization, whose way of thinking went on to give the world SCUBA diving and SCUBABOARD.

weaver of exasperating rhetoric

"Socrates method of philosophical inquiry consisted in questioning people on the positions they asserted and working them through questions into a contradiction, thus proving to them that their original assertion was wrong"

Of course, getting someone to accept proof is a whole different matter.

What I like to know is: Who is the DIR King of Trolls. Or do DIR Kings don't Troll? ....... Just Stroke?

I give up! You guys are One Way too serious. You have no sense of humor to laugh at yourselves.

To those of you enlightened DIR'rrrrs, as long as someone claims adherence, is it alright for them to be wrong?.... Or can they just not possibly be wrong?

Enjoy O-ring.

Where's my T-shirt or something?

Happy New Year - All..... Whatever way you do it.

 

[O-ring]

To those of you enlightened DIR'rrrrs, as long as someone claims adherence, is it alright for them to be wrong?.... Or can they just not possibly be wrong?

He's doing it again...

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Since the system works as well as it does, this is a logical inconsistency. How can you adhere to it and be wrong?:boom: :boom: :boom: :boom: (Incoming!!!)

 

[Scuba]

Northeastwrecks once bubbled...
Since the system works as well as it does, this is a logical inconsistency. How can you adhere to it and be wrong?:boom: :boom: :boom: :boom: (Incoming!!!)

Saying that a system works as well as it does, does not prove infallibility, but rather implies it. Therefore it is possible to be wrong. Logical, yes, inconsistent, is your argument. Another friendly fire casualty.

This is all theoritical in an imperfect world. I am aware you have found perfection.

I think O-ring saw the trap and avoided it, Northeastwrecks, you instead fell right into the "perfect" trap.

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Scuba once bubbled...


Saying that a system works as well as it does, does not prove infallibility, but rather implies it. Therefore it is possible to be wrong. Logical, yes, inconsistent, is your argument. Another friendly fire casualty.

This is all theoritical in an imperfect world. I am aware you have found perfection.

I think O-ring saw the trap and avoided it, Northeastwrecks, you instead fell right into the "perfect" trap.

Scuba, you take yourself just a little too seriously. Still smarting over the BC discussion, I guess.

It was a joke, for G-ds sake. Get over it and move on. Unless you've come back for Round 2?

You've convinced me that you are fallible. Few I've met are more fallible. This excuses anything you want in both your diving and your life in general. Now why don't you let the nice people in the white jackets give you your medicine.

I strongly suggest that you just lighten up.

 

[Scuba]

Northeastwrecks once bubbled...


Scuba, you take yourself just a little too seriously. Still smarting over the BC discussion, I guess.

It was a joke, for G-ds sake. Get over it and move on. Unless you've come back for Round 2?

You've convinced me that you are fallible. Few I've met are more fallible. This excuses anything you want in both your diving and your life in general. Now why don't you let the nice people in the white jackets give you your medicine.

I strongly suggest that you just lighten up.

Very funny.

At the risk of taking myself too seriously, what makes you think I may be smarting from the BC thread? Just because I chose to disengage and simply mentioned the tatics you employed, as opposed to giving you a detailed explanation of your errors in logic when present, doesn't seem to me like this would cause me to smart.

If I wasn't so infallible I might even be tempted to say there's a lot of smarting in your post.

But,

I am aware you have found perfection.

Is never being wrong the same as always being right?

Don't answer that.

 

[Scuba]

Oh, I forgot to address your last paragraph. So sorry, just try to imagine what it mus be like and have some compassion for those of us not gifted with sublime perfection.

Let me see if I have this right? You attempt to make a sound logical argument, then when I demonstrate its fallacy, you dismiss it as a joke, and accuse me of being fallible, crazy, and in need of some good medicine by the good people in the white jackets.

How typical.

You may rightfully call fallible, but just so you don't call me selfish and uncaring, I'm willing to share some of my good medicine with you.

Peace brother.

 

[Northeastwrecks]

You can rest assured that I won't litter my serious posts with :boom: and write "incoming". That is one of the problems with not being able to hear the words.

The only thing that you demonstrate is your worthiness for the nomination of this thread.

The sublime perfection stuff shows that the smog must be getting to you out there.

I'm not perfect, I just don't settle for mediocre.

Now, seriously, chill out, go diving and have fun.

 

[raviepoo]

Lawman,

After reading this post I now have a big, fat, non-sexual crush on you.

Lawman once bubbled...


The problem is that there are too many
people in this room that don't read editorials,
don't read op ed columns, don't read John
Leo, or Ann Coulter, or Safire, or Quindlen
or Will or anything that doesn't have numbers
in it. The level of comprehension is absymal!
Every expression of opinion is a troll to them.

What is merely clever use of speech to jepuskar
is highly offensive to the literal minded. If you want'
to be offended this is the place to do it.
:upset:

 

[Lawman]

mean I'm not just a pretty face anymore?ut: