Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:The fact that no one can even point out a single mistakeOn 2024-10-09 19:34:34 +0000, Alan Mackenzie said:Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> wrote:On 10/8/24 8:49 AM, Andy Walker wrote:... after a short break.Richard -- no-one sane carries on an extended discussion with
someone they [claim to] consider a "stupid liar". So which are you?
Not sane? Or stupid enough to try to score points off someone who is
incapable of conceding them? Or lying when you describe Peter? You
must surely have better things to do. Meanwhile, you surely noticed
that Peter is running rings around you.In other words, you don't understand the concept of defense of the truth.Maybe, but continuously calling your debating opponent a liar, and doing
so in oversized upper case, goes beyond truth and comes perilously close
to stalking.Calling a liar a liar is fully justified. I don't know how often itWe know Peter Olcott has lied in things that matter. However, I believe
needs be done but readers of a liar may want to know that they are
reading a liar.
his continual falsehoods are more a matter of delusion than mendacity.
As Mike Terry has said, OP's intellectual capacity is low. Calling him
a liar in virtually every post is, I think, unwarranted.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.