Fight Club Pub.

Originally posted by CA_Orot
reply to post by schrodingers dog

 

Lovely SDog. It really brings out your eyes.

That was my thinking too.

Congratulations AshleyD on the win! That debate (both sides of it) could be a lesson in how to have fun while fighting, but Ashley really shone.

@Mem – no fair getting any sweeter now, okay? We'll have to find a color that's more pink than pink for the MemoryShock Fan Club if you do.

@SDog – Grandma, is that you?

@Orange – I hope your shoulder feels better! Take care of yourself!

@Ian, nyk – good luck to both of you

@FSBA – teaching high school? You are a brave brave man

@everyone else

How the heck is everyone? I haven't been around in here for a while. I can't keep up with it, you guys all post so damn fast.

Thanks a bunch, ADB. That means a lot.

Hey, Mick! You going to start debating again?

NYK: Tick tock, tick tock.

[edit on 1/27/2009 by AshleyD]

reply to post by AshleyD


I don't know. I'm kind of scurred.

If I do, it's definitely going to be against MS. I've got to get some revenge. I want blood!

reply to post by Irish M1ck


But he's one of the scariest of all! I told him before I could never debate him because I'd spend most of my time looking up his vocabulary in a dictionary.

reply to post by AshleyD


Vocabulary?

Wait a minute, I'll be right back!

*googles vocabulary*

reply to post by AshleyD


One time I had to read a sentence of his 10x to figure out what the hell he was talking about. Check it out:

Originally posted by MemoryShock
Absolutely. If the ‘question’ is that which is merely pertaining to the course of action in a specified ‘foreseeable future’ time period, then the course of action undertaken in said time frame by default becomes the application(or lack thereof) of the solution. If long term goals become ruined, then another question regarding the new string of ‘foreseeable future’ becomes necessary and it may possibly become a vicious cycle of repetition.1

My head almost exploded.

reply to post by Irish M1ck


Yup. Exactly. One debate with him and I'd feel like a after reading the first paragraph of his opening statement. Way beyond my level of vocab. lol

So... um.... good luck with your vengeance plan. Keep a thesaurus handy.

The man is good.

reply to post by Irish M1ck


Egads - the 'sledgehammer' technique. Slam down with a definitive but near unintelligibly overcomplicated answer in a way that allows disagreement to be rhetorically fragmented into semantic uselessness, as it must, in its specific contradiction, interact with the muddied glop ladled from the presented tarpit of verbage. "Absolutely" is the give-away.

Or, MS was just being 'precise'.

reply to post by Ian McLean


Hey...you're the one who used 'Oubliette' in a debate...in poetic context no less!!

Mick...my head exploded when I re-read that...

reply to post by MemoryShock


It was "vain oubliette". But no one remembers that. I was particularly proud of adding "vain" at the time; I thought it gave it a nice euphonious pacing.

Hmm, strange thing to anthropomorphize, an oubliette.


Edit: to note with amusement my own vanity, and officially and explicitly say "welcome back to the Pub, M1ck".

[edit on Jan 27th 2009 by Ian McLean]

Originally posted by Ian McLean
reply to post by MemoryShock

 

It was "vain oubliette". But no one remembers that.

People remember "oubliette" and forget "vain."

That is hilarious.

Originally posted by Ian McLean
It was "vain oubliette". But no one remembers that. I was particularly proud of adding "vain" at the time; I thought it gave it a nice euphonious pacing.

Hmm, strange thing to anthropomorphize, an oubliette.

I can imagine the various tactics employed by neighboring dungeons vying for the attention of each other's prisoners...

"My Chains Have Less Rust On Them"

"Well My Rats Have Less Plague."

I'd definitely going to have to join S-Dog into looking this up in the dictionary. MS and Ian are making my head hurt with those multisyllabic words. Massive kudos to the next person who can use 'Oubliette' in their next debate while having it make sense in context. It should be an FCP contest.

reply to post by AshleyD


"multisyllabic"

Damn it Ashley ...

I'll be right back ...


Edit to add: It's tough being a stupid polyglot.








[edit on 27 Jan 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Wait! Before you go, look up 'anthropomorphize' for me. Better to make one trip instead of two. Or making me make my own to dictionary.com

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by schrodingers dog

 

'anthropomorphize'

That's easy:

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Oh duh. Ok. I've heard that one before then. I actually heard people who do that in books and films suffer from a form of psychosis. Thanks a bunch. Won't forget it again.

Originally posted by Ian McLean
reply to post by MemoryShock

 

It was "vain oubliette". But no one remembers that. I was particularly proud of adding "vain" at the time; I thought it gave it a nice euphonious pacing.

Hmm, strange thing to anthropomorphize, an oubliette.

absolutely, the vanity of the oubliette turned it from just being a rather odd metaphor into a work of art.

Although I didn't take it as an anthropomorphic "vain" – I mean, I thought you were just emphasizing the dead-endishness of an oubliette, not implying that it was subject to the sin of pride.

As for MemoryShock, I think it's the quotation marks that scare me more than the vocabulary. I can never figure out exactly what twist they're giving the sentences

Originally posted by AshleyD
Massive kudos to the next person who can use 'Oubliette' in their next debate while having it make sense in context.

It should be an FCP contest.

Oscitate used it in our Skirmish, so he deserves first kudos. I only managed to rebut by pointing out that he hadn't paid the necessary fee to Ian yet (it was while Ian was out of town, so I was safe in saying so). But I haven't seen Oscitate since then

[edit on 1/27/09 by americandingbat]