What's wrong with this pic?
-
Are you afraid of looking at each question in detail? We are now zooming into each claim of yours so that we can see the truth. If you are right you shouldn't be afraid. Go on, and stop saying I'm plainly labeling you without proof. Ask me why I said certain things. But only one topic at a time so that nothing is clouded over by chaos. Do not link it to another issue. One at a time.Originally posted by laurence82:Pls prove which attempt to answer my question will result in chaos and nonsense
as you label more, it seems you cant prove more
frankly my questions are pretty neat, i even go one by one
i even know the chain in which my questions arrive, so that i know if anyone attempt circular arguments or diversion
go on, my questions from the first page u flamed me till now are pretty in order, go find and dont push the blame to me, since you are the one who labelled them trollish, its your responsibility to dig and answer -
We have already looked at each question in detail for the past few pages. Whereby i pointed out which part you simply labelled. Please dont tell me you have sudden memory loss and forgot what you have done??Originally posted by Cenarious:Are you afraid of looking at each question in detail? We are now zooming into each claim of yours so that we can see the truth. If you are right you shouldn't be afraid. Go on, and stop saying I'm plainly labeling you without proof. Ask me why I said certain things. But only one topic at a time so that nothing is clouded over by chaos. Do not link it to another issue. One at a time.
There is no linking with any other issue. Please also prove (adding on to your list of unproved labellings), which question result in chaos?
Again, go dig. Please say that you cant, if you cant. Dont waste my time. I will stick to my right to call you troll. -
Yes I can't, because I think I have given adequate reply to your questions. If you don't post one issue here, I guess everyone can tell that you do not have valid claims and is just sowing discord here. Forget last night and start afresh. Pardon my inability to think well last night.Originally posted by laurence82:We have already looked at each question in detail for the past few pages. Whereby i pointed out which part you simply labelled. Please dont tell me you have sudden memory loss and forgot what you have done??
There is no linking with any other issue. Please also prove (adding on to your list of unproved labellings), which question result in chaos?
Again, go dig. Please say that you cant, if you cant. Dont waste my time. I will stick to my right to call you troll. -
Why forget last night? The issue in hand is the same as last night. Even bohiruci and beyond religion saw the same thing as me.So where is your guess about everyone. Blatant lies. You havent give adequate reply, because i am able to disprove them.Originally posted by Cenarious:Yes I can't, because I think I have given adequate reply to your questions. If you don't post one issue here, I guess everyone can tell that you do not have valid claims and is just sowing discord here. Forget last night and start afresh.
Please dont brush off last night because they are the same. Dont divert the issue.
So how, troll? I think i am still reserving the right to call you troll. -
OK, you have chosen not to defend your claims in saying that I am a troll. You fear being unable to take on my corrections, and you can only pull off an illusion by combining many issues, jumping around from topic to topic and ignoring my answers. That is so like the illusion of self and the 5 skandha, LOL.Originally posted by laurence82:Why forget last night? The issue in hand is the same as last night. Even bohiruci and beyond religion saw the same thing as me.So where is your guess about everyone. Blatant lies. You havent give adequate reply, because i am able to disprove them.
Please dont brush off last night because they are the same. Dont divert the issue.
So how, troll? I think i am still reserving the right to call you troll.
Therefore we conclude that you do not have the capability to defend any of your points when we zoom into the details of each one. -
NopeOriginally posted by Cenarious:OK, you have chosen not to defend your claims in saying that I am a troll. You fear being unable to take on my corrections, and you can only pull off an illusion by combining many issues, jumping around from topic to topic and ignoring my answers. That is so like the illusion of self and the 5 skandha, LOL.
Therefore we conclude that you do not have the capability to defend any of your points when we zoom into the details of each one.
I earned the right from last night
The reason why you said i cant defend is because you chose to wash last night matters, altho the issue is the same.
Please dont have sudden memory loss. Its despicable to act forgetful about things last night and want people to engage u all over again.
Who is 'we'? Seems you like to label things and use your own terms, including 'guess everyone'....Please dont act like you got majority support.
Again, i am still earning the right to call you troll. -
Alright, I shall give you the liberty by doing it for you, since you are unwilling to seek the truth and instead just want to "have the right to call me a troll".Originally posted by laurence82:Nope
I earned the right from last night
The reason why you said i cant defend is because you chose to wash last night matters, altho the issue is the same.
Please dont have sudden memory loss. Its despicable to act forgetful about things last night and want people to engage u all over again.
Who is 'we'? Seems you like to label things and use your own terms, including 'guess everyone'....Please dont act like you got majority support.
Again, i am still earning the right to call you troll.
1. You said i accuse him, poking relentlessly, but you still havent point how and what..
Its ok, i know you cant, so i will let you off on this
This is the first sign of showing your prejudice.
Despite several explainations, someone insist on continuing his old way
Sigh
Do you agree? -
Originally posted by Cenarious:
I have explained this part once, if not twice.
Alright, I shall give you the liberty by doing it for you, since you are unwilling to seek the truth and instead just want to "have the right to call me a troll".
[b]1. You said i accuse him, poking relentlessly, but you still havent point how and what..
Its ok, i know you cant, so i will let you off on this
This is the first sign of showing your prejudice.
Despite several explainations, someone insist on continuing his old way
Sigh
Do you agree?[/b]
Go look the part. Clue: The post have the answers about AEN and I talked abt my posted link, and Guan Yin thread.
Go one, you cant disprove that part actually. Why are you asking the exact same question again? -
No, I want you to type out a new post. You can cut and paste if you want, I dont mind. But keep in mind to stick to just this one issue.Originally posted by laurence82:I have explained this part once, if not twice.
Go look the part. Clue: The post have the answers about AEN and I talked abt my posted link, and Guan Yin thread.
Go one, you cant disprove that part actually. Why are you asking the exact same question again?
If you are right you WILL give me an answer and not tell me to look. (as I said you thrived on chaos last night right?) -
By the way the question you are supposed to answer is
"Do you agree?" -
Again, if the issue is discussed and you cant answer it, and you are the one calling me troll, prejudiced, why should i have the responsibility of looking up?Originally posted by Cenarious:No, I want you to type out a new post. You can cut and paste if you want, I dont mind. But keep in mind to stick to just this one issue.
If you are right you WILL give me an answer and not tell me to look. (as I said you thrived on chaos last night right?)
Just like your post admitted, you want me to type a new post about the same issue we discussed yesterday. Sorry, i am not going to fall prey to your tricks.
Again, your responsiblities to look for questions and answers posted last night. -
So do you agree that you showed prejudice?Originally posted by laurence82:Again, if the issue is discussed and you cant answer it, and you are the one calling me troll, prejudiced, why should i have the responsibility of looking up?
Just like your post admitted, you want me to type a new post about the same issue we discussed yesterday. Sorry, i am not going to fall prey to your tricks.
Again, your responsiblities to look for questions and answers posted last night. -
You dont even answer my questions, my one para i post each and exact questions you can even ignore, so why should i answer to your exact question?Originally posted by Cenarious:By the way the question you are supposed to answer is
"Do you agree?"
You want a level playing field, then play fair.
-
Again, answered before. Ask anotherOriginally posted by Cenarious:So do you agree that you showed prejudice?
I beginning to suspect that you dont even begin to look at my answers
-
Alright alright, I'll give in to you. I'll look for your latest answer. But for that ONE question only.Originally posted by laurence82:You dont even answer my questions, my one para i post each and exact questions you can even ignore, so why should i answer to your exact question?
You want a level playing field, then play fair. -
wey troll, got new questions? as in new questions for new issue?
dont still drag the old meat and beat, if you dont bother to dig, dont make me answer same questions. -
NopeOriginally posted by Cenarious:Alright alright, I'll give in to you. I'll look for your latest answer. But for that ONE question only.
For all questions that has been discussed
Like i said, you want to label people sentences without adequate proof, its your responsibilities. Its not for you to make people answer 99 out of 100 questions, of which prolly all 100 has been answered to. -
Yes, but I mean one at a time.Originally posted by laurence82:Nope
For all questions that has been discussed
Like i said, you want to label people sentences without adequate proof, its your responsibilities. Its not for you to make people answer 99 out of 100 questions, of which prolly all 100 has been answered to. -
If it has been discussed, then dont bother posting hor. I wont entertain.Originally posted by Cenarious:Yes, but I mean one at a time. -
Still no proof, dont xia shou wei qiang bu saying i would say there is no proof, because your 'proof' doesnt exist...so how to ignore..
This is the part of the post of your newest answer pertaining to my first question to you. You say that I label without giving reasons. Therefore in continuation of the issue on hand, I ask "So do you agree that you showed prejudice?"
What is your reply now? -
True. Where you have given reasons?Originally posted by Cenarious:Still no proof, dont xia shou wei qiang bu saying i would say there is no proof, because your 'proof' doesnt exist...so how to ignore..
This is the part of the post of your newest answer pertaining to my first question to you. You say that I label without giving reasons. Therefore in continuation of the issue on hand, I ask "So do you agree that you showed prejudice?"
What is your reply now?
Taking one quote and labelling them troll isnt proof you know. That statement, even as u admitted come after your question and my answer, therefore its right to say that as a round up to that question.
Again, i am entertaining you. This is not even a question, a quote or an answer. This is part of a conlusion.
Have you seriously nothing else to dig?
-
This is your answer. The rest of the post only serve as distraction.Originally posted by laurence82:True. Where you have given reasons?
You agree that you have shown prejudice.
Now I ask you: Does prejudice aid in helping NT2 understand more about the religion? -
All tiam tiam and go dig nose.
-
NopeOriginally posted by Cenarious:This is your answer. The rest of the post only serve as distraction.
You agree that you have shown prejudice.
Now I ask you: Does prejudice aid in helping NT2 understand more about the religion?
There is no agreement there is prejudice. Therefore the rest of the statements are moot.
Try again. By the way, labelling again...take up one quote and say they are prejudiced, now its agreement to prejudice. How low can you sink? -
By the way, that true is meant that my statement is true, or rather, the original quote is true.
I already said i wont answer your exact question unless you do so in the first place