Sweet.

quote:

---

Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael had this to say about Tron:
This is turning into that scene in "Last Starfighter" where Alex and Grig are in the Gunstar and they activate Death Blossom, except instead of Alex and Grig, we got Sage and Call.

Sweet.

---

I'd say it's more like a Godzilla flick in which Bloodsage and Call step on downtown Tokyo, with people like Fae and others pointing and screaming "KAIJU!" and fleeing, and Somthor is one of those lesser monsters like Jet Jaguar.

Khyron is one of the two little women who accompanied Mothra.

I love it when they break out the flatbed yadda yadda yadda

I stick by my Last Starfighter analogy.

quote:

---

Mr. Parcelan had this to say about Cuba:
I'd say it's more like a Godzilla flick in which Bloodsage and Call step on downtown Tokyo, with people like Fae and others pointing and screaming "KAIJU!" and fleeing, and Somthor is one of those lesser monsters like Jet Jaguar.

Khyron is one of the two little women who accompanied Mothra.

---

Hey, Mothra kicked ass.

quote:

---

Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael had this to say about Reading Rainbow:
Except Jet Jaguar is a good guy.

I love it when they break out the flatbed yadda yadda yadda

I stick by my Last Starfighter analogy.

---

Very well, Dethra. It seems we must battle in Otaku, Penguinan. But beware, for Parcedan does not back down easily.

quote:

---

Bloodsage had this to say about Knight Rider:
That's pretty much what I said, isn't it?

---

No.

Out of the 41 words in your response, only 7 can be connected to that statement: "without actually having to defend your ideas." That leaves 34 words of insult and mockery that in no way relate to anything I said. Giving you the benefit of the doubt via assumption that those 7 words were in fact your central point and the remainder simple window dressing, the point of your post, hereafter referred to in your own words as "what I said," is nearly 6 times smaller than the remainder of your post, hereafter referred to in my words as "pointless, unfounded and insulting crap."

You want to call me on not putting effort into making a statement (even when I had admitted that this was what I was doing until I could better phrase my opinion), then feel absolutely free, you are very much correct. If you want to foundlessly insult me, on the other hand, have the decency to say it.

This is what's always bothered me about you, Sage; this is why I get on your case more than anyone else on the board. Even if we see eye-to-eye on very little, it doesn't take a genius to see that you are a STAGGERINGLY intelligent man. You make excellent points and your argumentative skills are second to none (save possibly for Gyd, but it's kinda his job). I give you all the credit in the world for this.

But more often than not, when you get into one of these arguments, you wrap these well-reasoned arguments and logical points in layer upon layer of pointless insult and meaningless offense. It's not just disrespectful, it's counter-productive. The good points you do make (in my eyes, mind you) are marred by the fact that you make them by insulting the everloving crap out of your opponent. Take our little exchange, here. You could have simply noted the undeniable fact that I was, in fact, putting no effort into my response and trying to make it sound important anyway. Granted that I'd made note I'd explain myself today, but regardless. Had you said that, I wouldn't really have had any ground whatsoever from which to argue.

Instead, you covered the actual, logical portion of your argument with insult atop insult, until the actual point you were making in the first place became secondary to the venom with which you delivered it. I don't understand it, and this is more or less the nature of why I argue with you so bloody often.

Note that I'm not saying you're not allowed to do this or any such thing. The above is all just my personal confusion/pet peeve. Ignore at will.

quote:

---

Leopold, the Voice of Reason had this to say about Knight Rider:
No.

Out of the 41 words in your response, only 7 can be connected to that statement: "without actually having to defend your ideas." That leaves 34 words of insult and mockery that in no way relate to anything I said. Giving you the benefit of the doubt via assumption that those 7 words were in fact your central point and the remainder simple window dressing, the point of your post, hereafter referred to in your own words as "what I said," is nearly 6 times smaller than the remainder of your post, hereafter referred to in my words as "pointless, unfounded and insulting crap."

You want to call me on not putting effort into making a statement (even when I had admitted that this was what I was doing until I could better phrase my opinion), then feel absolutely free, you are very much correct. If you want to foundlessly insult me, on the other hand, have the decency to say it.

This is what's always bothered me about you, Sage; this is why I get on your case more than anyone else on the board. Even if we see eye-to-eye on very little, it doesn't take a genius to see that you are a STAGGERINGLY intelligent man. You make excellent points and your argumentative skills are second to none (save possibly for Gyd, but it's kinda his job). I give you all the credit in the world for this.

But more often than not, when you get into one of these arguments, you wrap these well-reasoned arguments and logical points in layer upon layer of pointless insult and meaningless offense. It's not just disrespectful, it's counter-productive. The good points you do make (in my eyes, mind you) are marred by the fact that you make them by insulting the everloving crap out of your opponent. Take our little exchange, here. You could have simply noted the undeniable fact that I was, in fact, putting no effort into my response and trying to make it sound important anyway. Granted that I'd made note I'd explain myself today, but regardless. Had you said that, I wouldn't really have had any ground whatsoever from which to argue.

Instead, you covered the actual, logical portion of your argument with insult atop insult, until the actual point you were making in the first place became secondary to the venom with which you delivered it. I don't understand it, and this is more or less the nature of why I argue with you so bloody often.

Note that I'm not saying you're not allowed to do this or any such thing. The above is all just my personal confusion/pet peeve. Ignore at will.

---

joo!

Vague, substanceless pomposity happens to be one of my pet peeves (I named this one George, and keep him in a parakeet cage near the picture window in our living room), right up there with locking threads just to get in the last word. It's also insulting, pretty much no matter how one looks at it.

Seems to me like there'd have been no problem if you took your own advice and simply laid out your logical arguments as if you were vertibrate.

Further, since you chose to jump into the middle of flames, rather than a formal debate or intellectual discussion, I'm not sure why you expect to be the sole exception and be treated with extra dignity. Especially since, in context, the airy way in which you dismissed the proceedings was an insult in itself.

You may style yourself "the voice of reason," but that, too, is insulting in the context of your airily superior pronouncement of disdain in the middle of someone else's flames. Feel free to partake, but ditch your expectation of diplomatic immunity; if you drop by just to tell us how you feel above it all, expect to be fragged.