I've been gone a lot, so....Follow

oh and 600 post for me!

Don't worry brother, it is only a temporary departure! I am sure you will keep everyone enamored with you most truly riveting conversation about what percentage of your post is U.B.S. I can hardly wait until the final numbers come in. Shouldn't you use some sort of handicap system like they have in golf? It would give everyone a chance to compete.

So in this, you are saying that if you claim something is worthless to you, then it can be called worthless? So if you think that the Magna Carta was worthless that makes it so?

That in itself is Unadulterated ******** because that is foolish.

According to websters worthless means without worth.

Main Entry:worth
Function: noun
1 a : monetary value
2 : the value of something measured by its qualities or by the esteem in which it is held
3 a : moral or personal value

By definition number two, my post would have worth. Skeet has already claimed that he holds this thread, and thus my post in high esteem. Thus to Skeet my post contains worth and is not worthless.

I do not think that an idea or item can be deemed worthless by one individual. Just because you think my writing lacks worth, does not mean that others (the vast majority) find it so.

For example...Say by chance that you were given an original copy of the Declaration of Independance. Since you are obviously a literary cretin and general dimwit we must assume to you this valued document would hold no worth. To collectors and historians though this document would be priceless. Is this document worthless just because you are a moron? No.

The same applies to my writing..and thus you are wrong.

Tacosid


Edited, Wed May 12 18:58:43 2004 by Tacosid

You are, I am almost certain, aware that critique is subjective, are you not? That being the case, should I deem the Magna Carta a French piece of solid waste, I could state so, and it would be so. In my critique. To this discussion, Skeet't opinion of you, and your writing, is hardly germane. I called your post UBS, as you have so eloquently TLA'd it. That is completely accurate. As the reviewer, that I wrote it makes it so for the purposes of the review. Other reviewers may, and have, disagreed to an extent. This does not obviate my position that it was so. Opinion is a beautiful thing.

That you do not believe one individual can deem an idea or a thought worthless goes to your ignorance of the principles of free will, as well as your complete misunderstanding of the English language. Since you obviously don't understand the language, or remotely its nuance, you are hardly in a position to comment on the technical merit of a post. Thus, I am right.

As for the Queesn, I would hardly call her endorsement ringing, or qualifying as a vast majority. As the vast majority of the people who are present at most times on this board either can't or don't post, it's a bump to your UBS rankings.

Who made you King?!

Twiztid

You are, I am almost certain, aware that critique is subjective, are you not?

Yes.

That being the case, should I deem the Magna Carta a French piece of solid waste, I could state so, and it would be so. In my critique.

But here in lies the quandry. I will grant that to YOU it may be worthless, but to society as a whole and to many individuals it is not worthless. Now if you were to have mentioned in the original argument that to you my post was UBS then it would have been one thing. In reality this is what you said,and I quote...



Now nowhere in this line do I see the term "in my opinion." What is stated within this line is that it is ********* and one of the definitions of which you are desperately clinging to is that something that is ******** is worthless. I have proven that my post has value and thus is not worthless. Now if you are going to sit there and say that I have to type something that has particular value to you in order for it to have value, then I may as well be pissing up a rope as you and I know that you are incapable of admitting my literary genius.

To this discussion, Skeet't opinion of you, and your writing, is hardly germane. I called your post UBS, as you have so eloquently TLA'd it. That is completely accurate. As the reviewer, that I wrote it makes it so for the purposes of the review. Other reviewers may, and have, disagreed to an extent. This does not obviate my position that it was so. Opinion is a beautiful thing.

Jibber jabber. Basically you are backdooring the whole topic by arguing that if something does not have value to you then it is worthless. On a personal scale perhaps all of my posts are Unadulterated bull ****. On a grander, more cosmic scale that post had much value, both on a educational and entertaining level. You may wipe your *** with a copy of the constitution just to prove a point, but if someone were to give a copy to me I would sell it.

That you do not believe one individual can deem an idea or a thought worthless goes to your ignorance of the principles of free will, as well as your complete misunderstanding of the English language.

And your simple minded belief that your deeming of something to have no worth makes it universal is both obtuse and beligerent.

Since you obviously don't understand the language, or remotely its nuance, you are hardly in a position to comment on the technical merit of a post. Thus, I am right.

You can close your eyes, cover your ears and go nyah, nyah, nyah all night long, but the truth of the issue is this...unless you want to narrow the parameters down to weather my posts have specific value or worth to you, and you alone then you have to have seen by now that there is value to my writing and that you are indeed wrong. We could rememdy this simply by posting...

Tacosid Posts:

To Moebiuslord-100 percent UBS.
To the rest of the forum: Entertainment, education and information, posts of high personal and univeral worth.

In this scenario you realize that what you are saying is that everyone else is wrong and only you are right...eh moe? Of course you may be pig headed enough to hold this party line, but the rest of the forum populace is not buying it.

Thank you for participating.

Tacosid

Edited, Thu May 13 00:50:54 2004 by Tacosid

Siskel liked it and Ebert did not. One said it was great the other claimed it was worthless, does the film have any worth?

But that is not the point of this post.

You claimed that my post was UBS, all but one line. I showed conclusively that it was not. The ONLY argument you have to support that it was indeed UBS is that you are entitled to your opinion. That is a crappy defense.

Moebiuslord-I have my lousy opinion and I am sticking to it!

Good work Moe.

Tacosid

Edited, Thu May 13 01:24:31 2004 by Tacosid

The use of "Good work Moe" was insincere.

Personally I think that everything you have posted on this thread is unadulterated bull ****. My pronouncement of course means that everything you have posted on this thread has no worth.

I say it, therefore it is.

Moebiuslord-Dispite irrefutable proof, I will stick to my guns. I will never, ever admit that I am wrong. All praise my mentor, the mighty Gbaji!

Tacosid

Mutual concept being of course that each of us are in our own pocket of reality and that there is of course no such thing as universal worth or value.

If you want to believe that, more power to you moe.

Tacosid