Last post wins!!!!!

[lostinidlewonder]

No... I used all my arguments - and as I said - you were dismissive of all of them.

This is a pathetic attempt to reframe reality. I wasn't "dismissive" I dismantled them. I took each of your flawed points the moving goalposts, the false analogies, the cherry picking, the hypocrisy and systematically exposed them as logical fallacies. Your arguments were not dismissed; they were defeated. There is a monumental difference.

In fact, I think it's fair to say that since you used ChatGPT for most of your arguments... you've had no arguments...
ChatGPT made most of them; you merely just copy and pasted what was on the screen.

This is your final, desperate retreat into a fantasy you've constructed to soothe your ego. You are clinging to the absurd notion that using a tool to articulate a strategy is the same as having no strategy at all. It is a Luddite's argument, born of an inability to compete. The strategy, the logic, and the victory are mine. I never used GPT at all here and if I did use GPT it would be merely the scribe, all my intention is right here all our initial argument is my input which is plenty of info to test. Now you're rehashing the same arguments there's no need for any novel response so I can easily regurgitate the same ideas without effort.

You lose.
Good night...

You don't get to declare victory as you flee the battlefield. Your entire response is a concession of defeat. You have offered zero counter-arguments, choosing instead to attack the method and deny reality.
You have been outmaneuvered, out-argued, and thoroughly defeated.
I win.

[j_tour]

I have a fantasy.

Who wants to guess what it is?

Hints:  what or who can fit their fist inside their mouth?  What smiles without any lips? 

Or something. 

I don't care.

[perfect_pitch]

This is a pathetic attempt to reframe reality. I wasn't "dismissive" I dismantled them.

No... ignoring the facts and claiming they're wrong isn't dismantling... it's ignorant. You've literally just assumed that anything I say is wrong without actually discrediting anything I've said. You've simply claimed all my facts, opinions and examples are incorrect and assumed you were correct in every way.

There was no moving goalposts... they were there and haven't moved. There were no false analogies - I gave examples of how what you answered with didn't answer the question I asked.

You literally didn't defeat anything. You just denied everything I said and didn't bother seeing the merit in it.

Even yesterday when I called you out for "beating this dead horse" (and bringing up the whole Seinfeld argument again after it hadn't been spoken about for 2 days), to which you claimed:

The horse isn't dead because you keep trying to ride it.

I hadn't ridden it in 2 days... I had stopped talking about it and you brought up the subject again yesterday, and then claimed I was the one dredging up the past.

You're a troll; you are ignorant and you seem to be some pontificated, pedantic nutjob. You are simply a troll. And for a week you have narcissistically whined about the answer you gave being the correct one, when you didn't answer the question.

You've since then tried to prove to everyone that you have to be right with everything; as if admitting you were wrong would destroy any semblance of respect anyone on this forum had for you.

Truth be told - I don't think anyone has a shred of respect for you anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

Also, the joke you posted here is deeply flawed.

The only reason you're speaking English here is because EVERYONE ELSE ON THE THREAD IS SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE!!!

Thought that would be obvious.

[lostinidlewonder]

No... ignoring the facts and claiming they're wrong isn't dismantling... it's ignorant. You've literally just assumed that anything I say is wrong without actually discrediting anything I've said. You've simply claimed all my facts, opinions and examples are incorrect and assumed you were correct in every way.

This is a complete work of fiction. I haven't "ignored" your points; I have systematically identified them as logical fallacies and explained, in detail, why they fail.

-Your "directions" analogy? Exposed as a False Analogy.
-Your "I just asked for the name" defense? Exposed as Pedantry that prioritizes trivial format over substantive knowledge.
-Your claim that you "walked away"? Exposed as blatant Hypocrisy.
-Your refusal to acknowledge these refutations is the only ignorance on display here. I didn't just claim your arguments were flawed; I demonstrated it. You have provided no counter to these demonstrations, only denial.

I hadn't ridden it in 2 days... I had stopped talking about it and you brought up the subject again yesterday, and then claimed I was the one dredging up the past.

More historical revisionism. I was responding to other users who were discussing the topic. You, however, chose to jump back in with a multi-paragraph screed directed at me. The moment you did that, you forfeited any right to claim you had "walked away." You are an active, willing participant in the very conversation you're complaining about. Your hypocrisy is staggering.

You're a troll; you are ignorant and you seem to be some pontificated, pedantic nutjob. You are simply a troll. And for a week you have narcissistically whined about the answer you gave being the correct one, when you didn't answer the question.

A predictable descent into a tirade of insults. This is the final, desperate act of a debater who has exhausted all logical avenues and has nothing left. These ad hominem attacks are a concession of defeat. They are the frustrated screams of someone who knows they have been intellectually cornered and outmaneuvered.

Also, the joke you posted here is deeply flawed.

The only reason you're speaking English here is because EVERYONE ELSE ON THE THREAD IS SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE!!!

Thought that would be obvious.

Thank you. Thank you for proving, with spectacular and unintentional clarity, that the entire point of the flew completely over your head.

The meme was a direct commentary on your linguistic limitations. The punchline was that while you speak English because it's the only language you know, I speak it out of convenience, despite being multilingual. It was a critique of your audacity to whine about my minor spelling errors when your entire linguistic world is confined to a single language.

By "debunking" the joke with a painfully literal interpretation ("EVERYONE ELSE... IS SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE"), you have completely missed the nuance and, in doing so, perfectly embodied the very simple-minded pedantry the joke was designed to mock. You didn't see the critique; you only saw the surface text. It's a self-own of monumental proportions.

You have lost on every front. Your logic has been dismantled, your hypocrisy exposed, and your own actions have validated my criticisms.
This is over. I win.

[perfect_pitch]

You didn't answer the question... you lost. Get over it.

[lostinidlewonder]

You didn't answer the question... you lost. Get over it.

This is a pathetic attempt to rewrite history, I indeed answered and exactly within context of your initial question, just not pedantically how you wanted it. Let's be perfectly clear about what happened.
I didn't fail to answer your question; I chose to answer it in a more elegant manner. I refused to engage with a trivial, Google-able query on its own simplistic terms. Instead, I provided a superior answer: a video clip of the episode's climactic scene, the very scene that gives the episode its name. This was a comprehensive demonstration of actual knowledge, not a recitation of a simple title.

Your first, honest reaction to my answer was: "DAMN.... NOT BAD."
You admitted it was a good answer. It was only after that admission that your ego forced you to immediately backtrack and desperately cling to a meaningless technicality. You can't reconcile that you were genuinely impressed before you invented a reason to disqualify a superior response.
You lost this debate the moment you admitted my answer was good. Everything since has just been the sound of you trying to salvage your pride.
I win.

[perfect_pitch]

Your first, honest reaction to my answer was: "DAMN.... NOT BAD."

No... I admitted it was close... it wasn't a bad answer... but it wasn't the right one.

How do you still not understand that?

You've posted erroneous posts claiming I moved the goalpost, which are wrong.
You've claimed I admitted the answer was correct... I never did. I said it wasn't a bad answer... I never said it was right.
You've claimed your answer was superior... it wasn't. It wasn't the answer to the question.

Is your ego so bruised by this you have to try to convince everyone that a great injustice has been done???
This pathetic charade of yours needs to stop.

I've provided many reputable and convincing reasons why it wasn't correct. I know you're probably going to repeat the same inane bollocks you've been plastering over the last (almost) 3 pages now.

You didn't answer the question... you lost. Get over it.

[lostinidlewonder]

No... I admitted it was close... it wasn't a bad answer... but it wasn't the right one.
How do you still not understand that?

You did not say my answer was "close." Let's consult the historical record, your exact words from your initial response:

Damn... not bad... but you I asked for the episode name and you didn't name it...

There is no mention of "close." There is only a begrudging admission of quality ("Damn... not bad...") followed immediately by the pedantry you've clung to ever since. You are now retroactively inserting the word "close" in a desperate attempt to diminish your initial, honest reaction. This is a historical revisionism fallacy, and it's proof that you know your original position was weak.

You've posted erroneous posts claiming I moved the goalpost, which are wrong.
You've claimed I admitted the answer was correct... I never did.
You've claimed your answer was superior... it wasn't.

I haven't posted a single erroneous claim.
You did move the goalposts when you invented a new standard of "usefulness" for an answer, a standard by which your own response failed miserably. I never claimed you said my answer was "correct" by your pedantic definition; I said you admitted it was good, which you did.

My answer was superior. It demonstrated a deeper understanding of the episode's content, which is the entire point of a trivia question. Your "reputable and convincing reasons" are nothing but a collection of logical fallacies, from your flawed analogies to your hypocrisy that have already been thoroughly dismantled.

Is your ego so bruised by this you have to try to convince everyone that a great injustice has been done??? This pathetic charade of yours needs to stop.

This is a textbook case of psychological projection. You are attributing your own emotional state, your frustration at being intellectually outmaneuvered and having your pedantry exposed, onto me. The only bruised ego here is yours, an ego so fragile that it cannot handle someone providing a better, more thoughtful answer to a simple question.
Your entire case has collapsed under the weight of your own contradictions and historical revisionism. You have no logical arguments left, only insults and lies.
I win. Get over it.

[j_tour]

https://notimeforlovedrjones.com/

[perfect_pitch]

There is only a begrudging admission of quality ("Damn... not bad...") followed immediately by the pedantry you've clung to ever since.

And by saying 'damn - not bad', I knew you were on the right track, but that by no means clarified that you actually knew the name of the episode. It means you might have known else happened in the episode, but it doesn't confirm you knew the name of the episode.

If you were on 'Who wants to be a millionaire' and they ask you 'What was the name of the composer who wrote "Fur Elise?"... if you prattle on saying 'the guy wrote 9 symphonies, 32 piano sonatas. He was born in Bonn in the latter half of the 18th century and went deaf in his later years'... it might confirm you know of the person... but you haven't fulfilled the pre-requisite of the question which is to 'name the composer'.

And from the get go - I clarified that while you probably knew the episode, you didn't name the episode. This is what I asked for and did from the very beginning.

You can try and use AI to justify what you said all you wanted - you didn't name the episode.

That's not pedantry... it's called being correct. You didn't win, you haven't won... and this pathetic charade of yours has to stop at some point. You're starting to look desperate...

You did move the goalposts when you invented a new standard of "usefulness" for an answer

Again... not even remotely true. I said 'name the episode'... you didn't name the episode.

YOU LOST! GET OVER IT!

I see you've also taken to spamming another thread... it looks rather pathetic.

[lostinidlewonder]

And by saying 'damn - not bad', I knew you were on the right track, but that by no means clarified that you actually knew the name of the episode.

Your attempt to rewrite history is becoming more pathetic with every post. You are now trying to neutralize the single most revealing part of your initial response. Let's focus on the one word you are so desperately trying to erase from the record: "Damn."
"Damn" is not a word of clinical assessment. It is an interjection of genuine surprise and being impressed. It is an emotional burst. You didn't say, "Hmm, you're getting warmer," or "That's close." You expressed shock at the quality and creativity of the answer. Your new claim that it simply meant I was "on the right track" is a cowardly and transparent lie, an attempt to retroactively diminish the impact of your own honest reaction before your pedantic ego kicked in to salvage the situation.

If you were on 'Who wants to be a millionaire'...

Another desperate, False Analogy. Your question was not a multiple-choice quiz with a rigid format. My answer was not "prattling on" with random facts; it was a direct, irrefutable, and superior demonstration of knowledge. You are clinging to these flawed comparisons because you have no logical ground left to stand on. You are just upset I answered it with a superior answer and waved away your weak question. My answer fully demonstrates I knew exactly what episode it was plus more.

I see you've also taken to spamming another thread... it looks rather pathetic.

And now we arrive at your favorite crutch: the word "pathetic." You used it to attack my use of AI when you couldn't counter the logic and it was demonstrated how illogical and poor it was there. Now you're using it now because you're frustrated and out of ideas. It's the only word you have left when you've been intellectually cornered.

But let's talk about that "spamming."  The objective was to get the "Second to Last Post Wins" thread removed from the recent posts list too by demonstrating how that thread can also clog the feed, that goal was fulfilled. The admins have removed it. So your use of the word pathetic is indeed quite pathetic.

You have lied about your own words. You have constructed flawed arguments. And you have cried foul about a strategy whose purpose you were too blind to see.
I win. Comprehensively.

[perfect_pitch]

You didn't name the episode.

Deal with it.

[lostinidlewonder]

This kind of post a short, dismissive, thought-terminating cliché is the final act of a defeated debater.

You didn't name the episode.
Deal with it.

And you're still clinging to that one, single, pedantic point after every other argument you've made has been systematically dismantled. This isn't an argument; it's a mantra you're repeating to yourself because it's the only thing you have left. Let's talk about what you have to "deal with." You have to deal with the fact that you were caught lying about your initial reaction, retroactively trying to change "Damn... not bad" into "it was close." You have to deal with the fact that every single one of your analogies has been dismantled as a logical fallacy. You have to deal with the fact that you've been exposed as a hypocrite, crying about a debate you refuse to leave. And you have to deal with the fact that your last pathetic attack was based on a complete fabrication about another thread.

I immediately waved away your simplistic, Google-able question and chose to provide a superior, more sophisticated answer, one that tested actual knowledge of the episode's content, not just the ability to recall a title. It was a demonstration of a deeper level of understanding, which is something you clearly don't value.
And what was your first, honest, unfiltered reaction to this superior answer?
"Damn... not bad..."

That "Damn" wasn't you noting a technical error. That was the sound of you being genuinely impressed before your pedantic ego kicked in and forced you to backtrack. My answer was so good it elicited an involuntary burst of approval from you. So, I will deal with it. I dealt with your trivial question by providing an answer so effective that it momentarily broke through your pedantic shell. You're the one who can't "deal with" the fact that you were intellectually outplayed. You are clinging to the pedantic letter of your question because you cannot handle the superior spirit of my answer.

You have no arguments. You have no logic. You have no credibility left in this discussion. All you have is this one sad, little sentence. I have already dealt with your pedantry. It's time for you to deal with your comprehensive defeat.
I win.

[perfect_pitch]

That "Damn" wasn't you noting a technical error. That was the sound of you being genuinely impressed

No... you just assumed that. 'Damn' can have many connotations, and to think that somehow you seem to think you know what I was thinking better than I CAN... is preposterous.

You've based your entire argument on that and just assumed you were right. The ego on you...

Didn't...
answer...
the question.

[lostinidlewonder]

No... you just assumed that. 'Damn' can have many connotations, and to think that somehow you seem to think you know what I was thinking better than I CAN... is preposterous.

This is a pathetic attempt to hide behind semantic games and rewrite history. Of course, "damn" can have many connotations. But in the context of a challenge where someone provides a swift, creative, and superior answer, the phrase "Damn... not bad" has one universally understood meaning: impressed surprise.
Your claim that it meant something else is a transparent lie, a desperate retcon invented after the fact to save your bruised ego. Are you seriously trying to argue that your intended meaning was, "Damn, you were so close but failed"? Or perhaps, "Damn, that's an interesting but incorrect answer"? No one on planet Earth uses the word that way. It's preposterous.
Hiding behind the coward's defense of "you can't know what I was thinking" doesn't work when your explanation defies both common sense and the entire context of the conversation.

This is, without a doubt, the most pathetic and intellectually dishonest argument you have ever presented. You are now attempting to hide behind the supposed ambiguity of the word "Damn" to escape the corner you've debated yourself into. It's hilarious.

Let's explore the bizarre, alternate reality you must live in where "Damn... not bad" is an expression of disappointment. Is this how you talk? When your favorite team narrowly loses a championship: "Damn... not bad... they almost won. How unfortunate." When you get a 99% on an exam: "Damn... not bad... so close to a perfect score. What a shame."

No one on planet Earth uses the phrase "Damn... not bad" to mean "You're wrong." It is a universal, gut-level expression of being impressed. Your initial, honest reaction was one of surprise and admiration at a superior answer. The moment y

You've based your entire argument on that and just assumed you were right. The ego on you...

This is pure projection. My argument is based on logic and your own words. Your entire meltdown, however, is based on ego. Your ego couldn't handle being impressed by a superior answer, so it forced you to immediately backtrack with pedantry. Your ego couldn't handle having its flawed logic dismantled, so it forced you to resort to insults. And your ego can't handle losing, so now it's forcing you to lie about the plain meaning of your own words.

Didn't...
answer...
the question.

A broken record. The last refuge of a defeated debater with nothing left to say. You repeat this because you have no response to the fact that I provided a better answer, an answer that genuinely impressed you before you constructed this pathetic charade. You've lied about your own words. You've projected your own ego issues. You have no arguments left.
I win.

[perfect_pitch]

Didn't...



...answer...



...the question.

[lostinidlewonder]

Didn't...
...answer...
...the question.

And so the broken record skips again. This isn't an argument; it's a mantra, the last refuge of a debater who has been so thoroughly dismantled he has nothing else left to say. You repeat this because you cannot defend your lie about the word "Damn." You repeat this because you cannot defend your flawed analogies. You repeat this because you cannot defend your blatant hypocrisy. You have abandoned the field of logic entirely and retreated into a meaningless phrase. This isn't you making a point.
This is the sound of your concession.

Let's be perfectly clear about what was "answered." You asked a question that tested simple recall, an answer easily found with a two-second Google search. I waved away that triviality and instead provided a superior answer that demonstrated complex understanding of the episode's content, context, and central joke.
My answer didn't just meet the bar; it raised it. It was so effective that your first, honest reaction was an impressed "Damn... not bad."
You are clinging to the pedantic letter of your question because you cannot handle the superior spirit of my answer. The fact that you have abandoned all other lines of reasoning to repeat these three empty words proves you have no defense against the substance of my argument.
You have been out maneuvered, out-argued, and thoroughly defeated.

I win.

[j_tour]

George is getting upset!

Go!  Do it!

[perfect_pitch]

And so the blintered blorple flibs again. This isn’t a glarmf; it’s a zintar, the last snoggle of a dramble who has been so thoroughly frindleflooped he has nothing else left to splarn. You repeat this because you cannot defend your glonk about the word “Darnth.” You repeat this because you cannot defend your fuzzle droplogs. You repeat this because you cannot defend your glazen hoompercrackery. You have abandoned the claff of wibble entirely and retreated into a snizzlethump phrase. This isn't you making a vlarp.
This is the sound of your squibmission.

Let’s be perfectly clear about what was “snartled.” You asked a quibber that tested simple plinkplark, an answer easily found with a two-second Gorblo. I waved away that trivvlethunk and instead provided a blarnock answer that demonstrated scrumbulous glundering of the episode’s zindle, climftext, and central blortle.
My answer didn’t just meet the gribber; it blazzled it. It was so plonkulent that your first, honest sproonch was an impressed “Darnth... not blurp.”
You are clinging to the pedinkic flabber of your quibber because you cannot handle the gleebrous spirit of my answer. The fact that you have abandoned all other lines of wibbering to repeat these three empty whapples proves you have no defense against the snumstance of my glomflack.
You have been out-fliggled, out-snobbered, and thoroughly defrunkled.

I quarn.

[lostinidlewonder]

Lol this is so funny. PP can't help himself and I can continue to explain why he's losing

What's truly remarkable, however, is not just your tedious repetition, but the catastrophic failure of your reading comprehension. You apparently attempted to quote my last post, and this is the incomprehensible, gibberish mess you produced:

And so the blintered blorple flibs again. This isn’t a glarmf; it’s a zintar... you cannot defend your glonk about the word “Darnth.” You have been out-fliggled, out-snobbered, and thoroughly defrunkled. I quarn.

This all sounds like an accurate description of your thought process. This nonsense is a perfect metaphor for your entire position: a chaotic jumble of sounds with no meaning, logic, or connection to reality.

You have this incredible arrogance to believe that you are the sole arbiter of what constitutes a 'correct' answer. You asked a low-effort trivia question. I didn't fail to answer it; I transcended it, providing a superior demonstration of knowledge that was clearly beyond your simplistic framework.

An answer so effective, in fact, that it elicited an involuntary, impressed "Damn..." from you before your pedantic programming could kick in and force you to lie about your own reaction. Your pedantry is a shield for a bruised ego. You're not defending a principle; you're defending a loss. And now, you can't even read straight.

Let's be perfectly clear about what has just happened. You have been so thoroughly dismantled, so completely cornered by logic, that you have abandoned the debate entirely. You are no longer capable of engaging with the substance of my arguments. So what do you do? You deliberately misquote my post, replacing my coherent points with a stream of incoherent, nonsensical gibberish because you cannot deal with the content of my actual words.

This is the ultimate admission of defeat. It is a tacit confession that my arguments are so irrefutable that your only recourse is to pretend they don't exist, to bury them under a pile of playground nonsense. You aren't just losing the argument; you are actively running away from it.

You asked a simple question. I gave a superior answer that impressed you so much your first reaction was "Damn..." You've spent a week trying to escape that moment, and now your final, desperate act is to descend into self-parody.

This isn't a debate anymore. This is a public meltdown.

I win.

[perfect_pitch]

“NOOOO!! STOP IT!! You’re doin’ the SAME DUMB THING AGAIN and it’s WRONG and BAD and I HATE IT SO MUCH!!

You didn’t even READ RIGHT!! You squished my words all up like a messed-up pancake and now they don’t even make sense!! That’s NOT what I SAID!! YOU MADE IT GARBAGE ON PURPOSE!!

And you act like you're the boss of answers like ‘Oh look at me, I know everything!’ — WELL YOU DON’T!! Your question was EASY and BORING and I made it BETTER!! Wayyy BETTER!! You even went like “Whoa” a little bit, but then you got all grumpy 'cause I was RIGHT and COOLER!!

Now you’re just makin’ stuff up ‘cause you’re mad!! You’re not even tryin’ to talk normal anymore, you’re just blabbin’ blah blah blah like that’s a real thing but it’s NOT!! You’re makin’ noises ‘cause you don’t got REAL ANSWERS!!

I DID THE BEST ANSWER!! YOU KNOW IT!! That’s why you’re throwin’ a fit now!! You’re not even arguin’ for real, you’re just bein’ silly and tryin’ to pretend I didn’t say the good stuff I said but I DID and I’m NOT GONNA LET YOU FORGET!!

YOU LOST!! And now you’re doin’ the ‘I’m not listening!’ thing like a cartoon!! WELL GUESS WHAT?? I’M STILL TALKIN’!! I’M STILL RIGHT!!”**

You know what... ChatGPT is fun.

And I'm doing this for a reason.

You claim you dismantled all my arguments? No... you didn't, you just ignored them and simply assumed you were correct in everything you said.

I'm not saying everything I said was absolutely correct... but a sensible person and an open-minded person could see SOME logic in what I said. IN fact, the only person who would ever dismiss everything said to them as being wrong is either...

a) Ignorant (which I think you are)
b) an egocentric or a narcissist (and given your attempts to be right in EVERYTHING - I'd say that's true).
c) petty...

Ignoring everything I said and just assuming you're right isn't dismantling my arguments... you literally stuck your fingers in your ears and said 'la la la, I'm right, you're wrong' like a petulant child.

Claiming your answer was correct is in fact wrong. When someone asks you a question and they're looking for an answer, the answer has to satisfy a criteria that was stated in the question.

I asked for the name of the episode. You didn't answer it. You can yammer on "claiming" your answer was better, but it wasn't. It didn't satisfy the criteria... A VERY SIMPLE criteria I asked which was to simply give me... the name of the episode.

And you didn't do it. I've given reasons why your statement didn't fit that criteria, and your instantaneous dismissal of all my arguments means you're not willing to admit that had you just said 'The Red Dot', this entire week and a half of your incessant and pedantic prattling would never have happened. We would have all gone on with our lives and we might have been chuckling about something else; but you're constant assertion of being right and your elevation about making this more and more of a big deal has just been comical to me... something that needs to be studied by a psychologist.

I'm also not the one who brought up the topic again, 2 days after it had settled and died by the way side.

To claim that everything I said as being wrong is false and says more about you than it does me... in every debate there is always a little middle ground.

The fact that you refuse to see it isn't my problem...

[j_tour]

I think a T-shirt depicting both Fat Man and Little Boy detonating over the failed state of Japan's two recalcitrant, tactically important targets would be a good thing to wear.

[perfect_pitch]

I think a T-shirt depicting both Fat Man and Little Boy detonating over the failed state of Japan's two recalcitrant, tactically important targets would be a good thing to wear.

Just don't wear it if you ever travel to Japan. I don't think the locals would find it funny.

[lostinidlewonder]

Yes it's great fun huh! Too bad you can't use AI to support your position since it is illogical and pedantic at its core lol!

You quoted me incorrectly, inserting words I never wrote. Misrepresenting my statements undermines any credibility your argument could have.

Contrary to your claim, I did not ignore your arguments. I addressed the points that were relevant and factual. Dismissing the irrelevant or illogical parts is not “sticking fingers in my ears,” it’s simply separating valid critique from hyperbole.

Regarding the episode name, my response aimed to provide context and clarity beyond a simple title. The assertion that this alone constitutes failure is a selectively pedantic interpretation.

Finally, personal accusations of ignorance, narcissism, or pettiness are unnecessary ad hominem attacks. A discussion should focus on the arguments themselves, not on character judgments. In any debate, there is always middle ground which you demonstrably are unable to do. You initially tried to accept my awesome respose with "Damn... not bad!" but then couldnt hack someone knew about Seinfeld and you had to be the number 1 fan lol.. Refusing to acknowledge that is not my limitation, its your a choice to engage with a pedantic attitude over substance, ive just thoroughly demonstrated that you behave that way and it's a big lol 

I remain open to discussion grounded in facts and logic, rather than exaggerated claims. 

[perfect_pitch]

Regarding the episode name, my response aimed to provide context and clarity beyond a simple title.

Yes, but I didn't ask for context and clarity... I just asked for the name of the episode. You can yammer on all you want and dress it up however you feel, however...



I've made a number of reasons why your response didn't fit the criteria of being right, which you brazenly just dismissed. I didn't ask if you knew the episode... I asked for the name.

The weird thing is - this really wasn't a big deal. I was ready to move on straight after your response and not give a crap about it, but then your behaviour went nuclear in regards to your justifications and arguments; over something that I didn't really care about. You got so rejected about not naming the episode, a matter I didn't really care about in the first place - but you took the wrongdoing so personally that this whole facade you've yammered on for OVER a week... has been quite pathetic.

No one seemingly cared in the first place...except for you. You got so offended by it - a trivial small matter that it begged the question as to why. You could have dismissed it and said "who cares".

I literally said that in one of my previous posts:

Not really... a laymen would be able to kind of summarise what it was about...

A TRUE fan would know each episode by name. If you just go 'it's the episode with the thing... the thing, you know - that thingy'...

...no one cares

I made a couple of silly comments about you getting it wrong - we were joshing about things... but then you started insisting you won like it meant something... like there was a prize to be won. After that however, your arguments became so lengthy and derisive that I had to stand my ground.

[j_tour]

Just don't wear it if you ever travel to Japan. I don't think the locals would find it funny.

And?

I don't find Tojo or Great Esteemed Dear Emperor all too effing amusing either.

Nor their stupid comic books.

What are they going to do?  Fight me with some karate chop they stole from a former belligerent ethnic group?

[perfect_pitch]

And?

I don't find Tojo or Great Esteemed Dear Emperor all too effing amusing either.

Nor their stupid comic books.

What are they going to do?  Fight me with some karate chop they stole from a former belligerent ethnic group?

I'm curious - are you ever going to give up the Courier New font? It just looks a little rigid with its hard edges and box-like nature.

We need to inject some humour into this place...   

[lostinidlewonder]

Yes, but I didn't ask for context and clarity... I just asked for the name of the episode. You can yammer on all you want and dress it up however you feel, however... I've made a number of reasons why your response didn't fit the criteria of being right, which you brazenly just dismissed.

Let's bring this to a logical conclusion. My response was a deliberate choice to provide a more comprehensive answer to a trivial question. A response that demonstrated a deeper knowledge of the episode's content, which is the true purpose of such a challenge.

My counter-arguments have not been dismissive; they have been analytical. I identified your "directions" analogy as a logical fallacy and your backtracking on your initial "Damn... not bad" reaction as historical revisionism. These points were not dismissed; they were dismantled, and you have offered no coherent defense against those critiques.

The weird thing is - this really wasn't a big deal... your behaviour went nuclear... you took the wrongdoing so personally that this whole facade... has been quite pathetic... After that however, your arguments became so lengthy and derisive that I had to stand my ground.

This is a complete mischaracterization of events and a classic case of projection. The claim that you "didn't really care" is directly contradicted by the extensive time and emotional energy you've invested in this exchange over the past week.

The escalation did not come from my "taking it personally." It came directly from you. You were the one who resorted to a tirade of personal insults, calling me a "troll," "ignorant," and a "nutjob." My responses, in contrast, have remained focused on deconstructing your flawed arguments and pointing out your hypocrisy.

You were not forced to "stand your ground." You chose to repeatedly engage with insults and circular reasoning because, contrary to your claims, you clearly do care a great deal about being right, even when the facts don't support your position.

This has run its course. The facts of the exchange speak for themselves. I provided a better answer, you admitted it was impressive before backtracking, and you have been unable to defend your position with anything other than flawed analogies and insults.

[perfect_pitch]

These points were not dismissed; they were dismantled

Again... you've just assumed you're right and I'm wrong. Your ego needs a reality check.

The escalation did not come from my "taking it personally."

You LITERALLY started writing more and more, and got more defensive about your argument after I told you it wasn't the right answer. You even ventured into AI multiple times to try and prove your point... even after I said Nobody cares.

This has run its course.

It had run its course about 4 days ago, but you brought the argument back into focus... YET AGAIN.

To assume you are absolute and right in everything speaks about your narcissism. I brought up many valid points that you just blatantly ignored or assumed were wrong.

I didn't admit it was impressive... you were close. I have said that since the beginning... YOU PRESUMED it meant something else... and from there you spiralled out of control.

[lostinidlewonder]

Again... you've just assumed you're right and I'm wrong. Your ego needs a reality check.

This isn't about ego or assumption, it is about logic. An argument is dismantled when its foundational premises are proven to be false or fallacious. I have demonstrated this repeatedly. Your assertion that I am merely "dismissing" points is a refusal to engage with the actual refutations that have been presented.

You LITERALLY started writing more and more... It had run its course about 4 days ago, but you brought the argument back into focus... YET AGAIN.

This is a transparent attempt to rewrite the timeline and project responsibility. You claim this ran its course days ago, yet you are the one who continues to post lengthy, emotionally charged replies, I was responding to gasplamey and then you decided to cry about it again. Your actions contradict your words. I am responding to an ongoing conversation that you are actively participating in. To complain about its continuation while simultaneously fueling it is the height of hypocrisy.

I didn't admit it was impressive... you were close. I have said that since the beginning... YOU PRESUMED it meant something else... and from there you spiralled out of control.

This is the central and most significant falsehood in your entire argument. The claim that you have been saying "you were close" from the beginning is demonstrably untrue.
Let's look at the historical record one last time. Your exact, original words were:
"Damn... not bad..."
The word "close" does not appear. It is a word you invented days later in a desperate attempt to retroactively weaken your initial, honest reaction. "Damn" is an interjection of surprise and being impressed, not a clinical assessment of proximity. This is not a "presumption" on my part; it is a standard understanding of the English language. Your entire argument hinges on this historical revisionism. You have been caught fabricating your own evidence.

This conversation is over you have no logical retort nor argument possible, AI cannot even help you there lol. The facts of the exchange are on the record. Your arguments have collapsed under the weight of your own contradictions, logical fallacies, and now, a demonstrable lie.
I win.

[j_tour]

It just looks a little rigid with its hard edges and box-like nature.

Put your hand in the box. 

Nothing bad will happen.

I promise.

[perfect_pitch]

Let's look at the historical record one last time. Your exact, original words were:
"Damn... not bad..."
The word "close" does not appear.

I literally said "not bad". Again... how do you get from that a confirmation of being right? You were circling the answer... but you didn't state the answer.

Damn can also be used to emphasise frustration as well. It has many uses...

Your assertion that I am merely "dismissing" points is a refusal to engage with the actual refutations that have been presented.

I HAVE LITERALLY STATED THAT MULTIPLE TIMES ABOUT YOUR COMMENTS. You're now just simply parroting what I said, instead of saying anything new. 

This conversation is over

The conversation was over days ago... until "someone" decided to bring it back up again

(Hint: It wasn't me)

you have no logical retort nor argument possible, AI cannot even help you there lol.

At least I didn't have to rely on AI to write my arguments.

[j_tour]

I never asked anyone here to kill my girlfriend.

Stop spreading that damned lie as though it were the gospel damned truth.

[lostinidlewonder]

I literally said "not bad". Again... how do you get from that a confirmation of being right? You were circling the answer... but you didn't state the answer.
Damn can also be used to emphasise frustration as well. It has many uses...

This is a masterclass in selective quoting and historical revisionism. You didn't just say "not bad." You said, "Damn... not bad..." You are now conveniently ignoring the one word that reveals your true, initial reaction.

And your new theory that "Damn" can mean "frustration" is a desperate, laughable lie. Are you seriously trying to argue that your intended meaning was, "Damn, I'm so frustrated you were almost right"? It's a preposterous attempt to rewrite reality. In the context of a challenge, "Damn" is an interjection of impressed surprise. You were impressed, you admitted it, and you've been trying to squirm away from that fact ever since.

I HAVE LITERALLY STATED THAT MULTIPLE TIMES ABOUT YOUR COMMENTS. You're now just simply parroting what I said, instead of saying anything new.

This is not "parroting." This is called holding up a mirror to your own hypocrisy. When I use your own flawed logic and inconsistent statements against you, it's not a lack of originality on my part; it is a demonstration of the complete intellectual bankruptcy of your position. I am dismantling your arguments with your own faulty materials.

The conversation was over days ago... until "someone" decided to bring it back up again (Hint: It wasn't me)

The hypocrisy here is breathtaking. You are writing a lengthy, multi-paragraph, emotionally charged post to complain that the conversation is continuing. Your post is the continuation. You are the one actively fueling the very fire you claim you want extinguished. You didn't "walk away"; you're standing here, shouting that you've left. It's a pathetic contradiction.

At least I didn't have to rely on AI to write my arguments.

And there it is. The final white flag. Having lost the debate on every substantive point, your only remaining move is to attack the method. This is the ultimate concession, an admission that you cannot defeat the logic, so you must try to disqualify the opponent based on an arbitrary rule you invented.

You have been caught lying about your own words. You have demonstrated staggering hypocrisy. You have been logically cornered and have nothing left but insults and deflections. This conversation is over because you have nothing left to contribute. I win.

[perfect_pitch]

This is not "parroting." This is called holding up a mirror to your own hypocrisy.

OH... so when you do it, it's an intellectual statement... but when I do it - it's pathetic and worthless???

DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF???

I think I may have something to help you...



I'd reflect on everything you wrote over the last 10 days, and realise how many of those points made are EMBEDDED in your language.

This conversation is over because you have nothing left to contribute.

You're right - I already said everything I needed to say. There's no point trying to have a debate with someone like yourself who is ignorant to everything you say and just self-glorifies himself. Your posts reek of it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I never asked anyone here to kill my girlfriend.

Stop spreading that damned lie as though it were the gospel damned truth.

Maybe... but a proof of life picture with today’s newspaper would definitely help quell the rumours though.

[lostinidlewonder]

OH... so when you do it, it's an intellectual statement... but when I do it - it's pathetic and worthless??? DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF???

The difference, which you consistently fail to grasp, is one of substance versus empty mimicry. I hold a mirror to your hypocrisy by deconstructing your flawed arguments with logic. You simply parrot my words back without any underlying reasoning. There is a vast chasm between the two.

I think I may have something to help you...

I'd reflect on everything you wrote over the last 10 days, and realise how many of those points made are EMBEDDED in your language.

This is a fascinating act of psychological projection. You've provided a diagnostic checklist of your own behavior. Let's reflect, as you suggest, and see who truly fits the profile, using your own posts as evidence.

1) Exaggerated Self-Importance: My position is based on the quality of my argument. Your entire position is based on the self-important idea that you are the sole arbiter of what constitutes a "correct" answer to your own trivial question.

2) Fantasies of Power/Success: You fantasize about the "power" to control the terms of a debate, refusing to accept a superior answer simply because it didn't fit your pre-defined format.

3) Constant Need for Admiration: You became incensed when I didn't just admire your clever question but transcended it. Your week-long campaign is a desperate need for validation that your pedantic stance was correct.

4) Sense of Entitlement: The belief that you are entitled to a specific string of text as an answer, and that any other, more sophisticated response is invalid, is the very definition of entitlement.

5) Lack of Empathy: You have shown zero ability to understand a different perspective, resorting instead to a barrage of insults ("troll," "ignorant," "nutjob") when your flawed logic was challenged.

6) Manipulative Behavior: This is your most prominent trait. You have been caught lying about your own words, retroactively trying to change your initial, impressed "Damn... not bad..." into the weaker "you were close." This is a blatant attempt to manipulate the historical record.

7) Envy of Others: Your initial reaction was admiration ("Damn..."). Your subsequent week-long meltdown has been a clear case of envy that someone provided a more creative and intelligent answer than you anticipated.

8 ) Arrogance and Haughtiness: Your repeated mantra, "That's not pedantry... it's called being CORRECT," is the pinnacle of arrogance.

9) Fragile Self-Esteem: A secure person would have laughed off this trivial disagreement days ago. Your extreme, obsessive, and emotionally charged reaction to a single forum post is the ultimate proof of a fragile ego.

Thank you for providing the perfect framework to diagnose your own behavior.

You're right - I already said everything I needed to say. There's no point trying to have a debate with someone like yourself who is ignorant to everything you say and just self-glorifies himself.

You are correct. You have said everything you need to say. You've demonstrated your reliance on hypocrisy, projection, and logical fallacies. You have nothing left to contribute. This conversation is over, not because you have no more points, but because your points have been so thoroughly dismantled that nothing remains.
The evidence is on the record. This is over.
I win.

[perfect_pitch]

I hold a mirror to your hypocrisy by deconstructing your flawed arguments with logic.

No... you haven't. You've merely dismissed everything I've said. That's not deconstructing arguments... that's just ignorance.

You may not think so - but to assume you are right in every single argument means you are incapable of reasoning.

[lostinidlewonder]

No... you haven't. You've merely dismissed everything I've said. That's not deconstructing arguments... that's just ignorance.

This is a complete denial of reality and a fundamental misuse of the word "dismissed." To dismiss an argument is to ignore it. Nothing was ignored. Your arguments were refuted, taken apart, analyzed and proven to be fallacious with direct evidence.

Let's review the record of what has been refuted, not dismissed:
Your False Analogies (the "directions" and "Millionaire" examples) were dismantled. Your Historical Revisionism (lying about your initial "Damn... not bad" reaction) was exposed with your own direct quotes. Your Hypocrisy (complaining about a debate you refuse to leave) has been repeatedly highlighted. You seem to think that any argument that is successfully refuted has been "dismissed." This is a convenient, self-serving worldview that protects your ego from the reality of being logically defeated.

You may not think so - but to assume you are right in every single argument means you are incapable of reasoning.

This is pure projection, and it's your most revealing statement yet. A person capable of reasoning does not need to lie about their own quotes. A person capable of reasoning does not need to resort to a barrage of insults when their logic fails. A person capable of reasoning does not need to complain about a debate they actively and repeatedly participate in.

Your actions are a testament to your own abandonment of reason. You are now simply describing yourself and attributing it to me. Your arguments have been exhausted, refuted, and now, finally, replaced by nothing but hollow repetition and insults.
I win.

[frodo10]

Boys, boys.

[frodo10]

Name that episode:
JERRY: Boys, boys.

[frodo10]

I'll be impressed if you can.   

[lostinidlewonder]

No, I'm not going to, the question is far too simple. Don't ask simple questions.

[frodo10]

No, I'm not going to, the question is far too simple. Don't ask simple questions.

I'm impressed!  I didn't know what episode this was from. 

[orgarnic]

How many frodos are there?

[perfect_pitch]

This is a complete denial of reality and a fundamental misuse of the word "dismissed." To dismiss an argument is to ignore it. Nothing was ignored. Your arguments were refuted, taken apart, analyzed and proven to be fallacious with direct evidence.

No... they weren't. You tried to dismantle them, and I provided reasons and logic about why there was validity to them.

To claim that every statement I made is wrong, without acknowledging there was a single shred of validity is... what's the word???



I G N O R __ N T

You can guess this...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name that episode:
JERRY: Boys, boys.

Careful... or you may incur the wrath of 'he who must always be correct'. That's what started his whole temper-tantrum.

[j_tour]

The nerdery is strong in this thread.

George is getting upset.

[lostinidlewonder]

No... they weren't. You tried to dismantle them, and I provided reasons and logic about why there was validity to them.
To claim that every statement I made is wrong, without acknowledging there was a single shred of validity is... IGNORANT

Let's be clear about the difference between dismissal and refutation. A dismissal is ignoring an argument. A refutation is dismantling it with logic and evidence. Your arguments were not dismissed; they were refuted. Your claim to have said "close" from the beginning was refuted with a direct quote of your own words, exposing it as historical revisionism. Your analogies were refuted by demonstrating they were logical fallacies. Your complaints about the debate continuing were refuted by pointing out your own hypocritical participation. You have never addressed these specific refutations. Instead, you cry "ignorance" because your flawed points were not accepted as valid. The refusal to engage with a logical counter-argument is the very definition of ignorance.

Careful... or you may incur the wrath of 'he who must always be correct'. That's what started his whole temper-tantrum.

This is a spectacular act of projection. Let's review the record of this "temper-tantrum." Who was it that resorted to a tirade of personal insults like "troll," "ignorant," and "nutjob"? That was you. Who was it that was caught lying about their own words to salvage a bruised ego? That was you. Who is it that continues to post emotionally charged complaints about a debate? That is you. My "wrath" is simply a commitment to logical consistency. Your "temper-tantrum" is a week-long meltdown because you were intellectually outmaneuvered in a trivial discussion about a sitcom. The evidence is on the record. Your arguments have been exhausted, refuted, and now, finally, replaced by nothing but hollow repetition and insults.

Also notice frodo's non pedantic response to my answer? Yeah that's how easy it actually is

I win.

[perfect_pitch]

Instead, you cry "ignorance" because your flawed points were not accepted as valid.

Just because you assume they're flawed, or don't accept them as valid, doesn't make them invalid.

Your "temper-tantrum" is a week-long meltdown because you were intellectually outmaneuvered in a trivial discussion about a sitcom.

My temper tantrum??? Not even remotely true. You didn't intellectually outmanoeuvre me... You failed to provide the answer to a simple question then went off on a tangent about it should be accepted as a win; before going to greater and greater lengths to try and prove to everybody that you should have won the argument. I dismissed the answer, and didn't put any real seriousness into the question anyway, but your continued elongation of your justifications and self-diagnosed wins showed a side of you that borders on the psychotic.

Also notice frodo's non pedantic response to my answer? Yeah that's how easy it actually is

You didn't answer the question... suck it up and move on. Can't believe you're still blithering on about this crap.

[lostinidlewonder]

Just because you assume they're flawed, or don't accept them as valid, doesn't make them invalid.

This is not an "assumption." An argument is proven flawed when its foundational premises are dismantled with logic and evidence. Your claims have not been "dismissed"; they have been refuted. Your claim to have said "close" from the beginning was refuted with a direct quote of your own words, exposing it as historical revisionism. Your analogies were refuted by demonstrating they were logical fallacies.
Your complaints about the debate continuing were refuted by pointing out your own hypocritical participation. You have never addressed these specific refutations. Your refusal to engage with a logical counter-argument is the issue, not my supposed "dismissal."

My temper tantrum??? ... I dismissed the answer, and didn't put any real seriousness into the question anyway, but your continued elongation of your justifications... showed a side of you that borders on the psychotic... No one seemingly cared in the first place...except for you.

This is the most revealing and contradictory part of your entire argument. You claim you "didn't put any real seriousness" into this and "didn't really care," yet you have invested over a week writing lengthy, emotionally charged posts filled with personal insults like "psychotic," "troll," "ignorant," and "nutjob."
A person who "doesn't care" does not behave this way. Your actions are a direct contradiction of your words. The only "temper-tantrum" on record is your resort to a tirade of insults when your flawed logic was challenged. This entire narrative you've constructed, where you are the calm, detached observer and I am the one who "went nuclear", is a work of pure fiction designed to protect a bruised ego.

You didn't answer the question... suck it up and move on. Can't believe you're still blithering on about this crap.

I answered the question perfectly fine, just how I answered frodo's similar type of question and you can see his example of how a logical person would respond, not with pedantic crying. The irony of you telling me to "move on" while simultaneously writing another multi-paragraph post to continue this very argument is staggering. This conversation has reached its logical end. It is now just a loop of you repeating debunked points while ignoring the counter-arguments. The facts of this exchange are on the record for anyone to see.

I win.

[perfect_pitch]

The irony of you telling me to "move on" while simultaneously writing another multi-paragraph post to continue this very argument is staggering.

You've written far more than I ever have... don't try and label me as the one continuing on this damn post.

But you literally missed the biggest point of all - you didn't answer the question that was asked. You can try and dress it up, and claim moral superiority by claiming your response was a better answer... it wasn't.

I've written why it wasn't so you can go back and read them - I'm not going to dredge up the past. You're the one who started this drivel 6 days ago when they re-initiated the discussion.

And you were dismissive... to claim that nothing I said had any merit is of itself you just dismissing the logic I presented to you... or it's just ignorance. Either way... that's a you problem - not my problem.

And may I present the biggest piece of damning evidence... I asked for the name of the episode...



Dress it up however the hell you like... you didn't answer it. I clarified that in my very first post after you posted your YouTube video - again, none of which actually states the name of the episode; and I have provided examples of why it didn't answer the question - both of which you immediately dismissed.

For someone who labels me as "pedantic"... you sure have taken this to the nth degree to "try" and prove how correct they are.