Soda's Wager With Ian

Resurrection of all-time best threads

Should Ian Accept Soda's Bet

Yes
29
73%
No
11
28%
 
Total votes: 40

User avatar
Cogito
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:18 pm

Post by Cogito » Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:34 pm

For a while, mac, I thought "Yay! Popcorn!" Now I just think earplugs, blinkers, and I wonder if LPTT is running.
ergo... um...

User avatar
Ian_in_DC
Evil Overlord
Posts: 7853
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:25 am

Post by Ian_in_DC » Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:35 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:Yes.

Results 1 - 10 of about 81,500 English and Finnish pages for extreme latent psychosis. (0.33 seconds)

And no, not many of them are in Finnish.

Nope, sorry - "extreme" used on the same webpage where "latent psychosis" does not count as validating it Soda. Please provide proof positive where latent psychosis has been described as "extreme." I thought not. Take your licks, Gimp, and move on.

I think your mock Moldovan credentials, as poorly constructed as they were, are still more credible than your mock psychology bona fides.
"You are the son of an incestuous union." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Bst6OXEUg

User avatar
i_have_shiny_shoes
playing outside
Posts: 6162
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:36 am

Post by i_have_shiny_shoes » Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:40 pm

Please provide proof positive where latent psychosis has been described as "extreme."


Hmmmm. There must be one example in 83,000 results. Please post it when you find it, Soda.
we're discussing it, so it's not secret.

Rosie Redux
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:57 pm

Post by Rosie Redux » Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:48 pm

is there a difference between an extreme latent psychosis, psychosis that is extremely latent and a latent psychosis that is extreme?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

User avatar
i_have_shiny_shoes
playing outside
Posts: 6162
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:36 am

Post by i_have_shiny_shoes » Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:14 pm

Latent psychosis can most definitely become extreme - above you'll find about 83,000 examples.


Soda, I do believe the onus is on you to prove your assertion. Not one of the examples you've listed above concerns the condition of latent psychosis becoming extreme, so at present you would appear to be in the wrong. I'm still waiting. So prove it, or withdraw it. If there's 83,000 examples, you'll find on very easily, won't you?

I notice you are very unwilling to address the fact that Ian insist on searching for "extreme latent psychosis" despite the fact that I neither used that term in that form.


I did within the thread itself, if you remember. There's very little need for me to repeat myself.
we're discussing it, so it's not secret.

User avatar
Moethebartender
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 12413
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:11 pm

Post by Moethebartender » Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:34 pm

i_have_shiny_shoes wrote:
Please provide proof positive where latent psychosis has been described as "extreme."


Hmmmm. There must be one example in 83,000 results. Please post it when you find it, Soda.


You have to google the phrase in Finnish - it shows up on the same website that 'despotic theory' appears on.


Funny that soda was so "keen to meet up" with someone he thinks has "extreme latent psychosis" that he's been posting about it for months after he was snubbed.
Korky wrote:i remember being on Samothraki island is 2003 and apologizing for being an American under Bush II.
Seamus wrote:I flounced from certain aspects of the Stew.

User avatar
Moethebartender
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 12413
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:11 pm

Post by Moethebartender » Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:51 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:Moe -

The discussion about latent psychosis rambled on for perhaps 100 - 120 comments.

Not one disputed you my labelling you psychotic.


soda, I don't know if you recognize the irony of you trying to make that point on a 12 page thread (one of several threads, actually) devoted to pointing out that you are a compulsive lying cunt, but I found it amusing.
Korky wrote:i remember being on Samothraki island is 2003 and apologizing for being an American under Bush II.
Seamus wrote:I flounced from certain aspects of the Stew.

User avatar
Ian_in_DC
Evil Overlord
Posts: 7853
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:25 am

Post by Ian_in_DC » Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:57 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:You're psychotic - you don't laugh, you just choke in a different register.

Wow, my IIQ meter just went haywire. For someone who creates a multitude of mock biographies because he's ashamed of his rather mediocre credentials, Soda sure employs "projection" as a tactic frequently.
"You are the son of an incestuous union." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Bst6OXEUg

User avatar
cowtown
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 25678
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:53 pm

Post by cowtown » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:04 pm

mutha is fixing
Jim-2012 wrote:I *heart* Hitler



Image

User avatar
simon_in_exile
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 12811
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:14 am

Post by simon_in_exile » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:08 pm

I think The Log is stored somewhere within this thread.
In an extreme situation, maybe it could be found using a latent google search.
La ruta nos aportó otro paso natural.

User avatar
Ian_in_DC
Evil Overlord
Posts: 7853
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:25 am

Post by Ian_in_DC » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:10 pm

simon_in_exile wrote:I think The Log is stored somewhere within this thread.
In an extreme situation, maybe it could be found using a latent google search.

The Log WAS posted here but Eric deleted it because it revealed him to be the fish-porn culprit.
"You are the son of an incestuous union." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Bst6OXEUg

User avatar
Cogito
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:18 pm

Post by Cogito » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:20 pm

Fish porn?
ergo... um...

User avatar
cowtown
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 25678
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:53 pm

Post by cowtown » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:24 pm

mutha is fixing
Jim-2012 wrote:I *heart* Hitler



Image

User avatar
cowtown
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 25678
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:53 pm

Post by cowtown » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:26 pm

Cogito wrote:Fish porn?



Fish porn was another stew incident, disco Danni went on a bender and enlightened us to a new type of porn and yes, its was probably about what you think, humans and fish and in unlogly union
Jim-2012 wrote:I *heart* Hitler



Image

User avatar
Cogito
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:18 pm

Post by Cogito » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:27 pm

I wasn't aware fish had the necessary orifices. Edewkayshun here today.
ergo... um...

User avatar
cowtown
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 25678
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:53 pm

Post by cowtown » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:33 pm

mutha is fixing
Jim-2012 wrote:I *heart* Hitler



Image

User avatar
simon_in_exile
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 12811
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:14 am

Post by simon_in_exile » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:35 pm

I completely missed that. There truly is nothing like a Dane...
La ruta nos aportó otro paso natural.

User avatar
section8
the Secret Sauce
Posts: 28625
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 11:46 pm

Post by section8 » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:36 pm

'Tis true. Halibut are rumored to have kept some lonely fishermen company on long legs at sea.
This is the only musical: the mouth. And hopefully the brain attached to the mouth. Right? The brain, more important than the mouth, is the brain. The brain is much more important.

User avatar
Moethebartender
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 12413
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:11 pm

Post by Moethebartender » Wed Feb 20, 2008 4:36 pm

Cogito wrote:I wasn't aware fish had the necessary orifices. Edewkayshun here today.


Dani must have had an extremely small unit.

Coincidentally, soda was upset about dani being banned...

Ian wrote:Wow, my IIQ meter just went haywire. For someone who creates a multitude of mock biographies because he's ashamed of his rather mediocre credentials, Soda sure employs "projection" as a tactic frequently.


No shit.
Korky wrote:i remember being on Samothraki island is 2003 and apologizing for being an American under Bush II.
Seamus wrote:I flounced from certain aspects of the Stew.

tph24601
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 6640
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:32 pm

Post by tph24601 » Wed Feb 20, 2008 4:58 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:IHSS -

Latent psychosis can most definitely become extreme - above you'll find about 83,000 examples.

it's pretty useless to get though all the nonsense, but I would have to say the logic of saying the 81000 or 83000 search results are all examples of Latent psychosis can be classified as extreme is quite flawed

but then again, it is soda logic.......

User avatar
Ian_in_DC
Evil Overlord
Posts: 7853
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:25 am

Post by Ian_in_DC » Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:49 pm

Shhh. Don't tell Soda that latent means existing in a dormant or unconscious form. And once it becomes "extreme" it ceases to be latent. WWDD (What would Derrida do?)
"You are the son of an incestuous union." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Bst6OXEUg

User avatar
Ian_in_DC
Evil Overlord
Posts: 7853
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:25 am

Post by Ian_in_DC » Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:56 pm

UYG....

We gotta keep this "gem" as part of the historical record.
"You are the son of an incestuous union." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Bst6OXEUg

User avatar
Ian_in_DC
Evil Overlord
Posts: 7853
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:25 am

Post by Ian_in_DC » Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:55 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:So this quote would be quite correct then, wouldn't it -

"his latent psychosis has become so extreme..."

No, it wouldn't be correct, dear boy. Once it becomes extreme, it ceases to be latent and becomes overt psychosis - "latent" and "extreme" are mutually exclusive. You would have stated that Moe's psychosis was so extreme or at least caveated it with verb illustrating change like "progressed." Please do try to keep up.

Then again, I guess being a Moldovan, English isn't your native tongue anyways.
"You are the son of an incestuous union." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Bst6OXEUg

User avatar
Ian_in_DC
Evil Overlord
Posts: 7853
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:25 am

Post by Ian_in_DC » Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:41 pm

UYG.

Notice how Soda on pages 7-9 claims that this is a completely fabricated CV. It takes several days - after Soda discredits the entire work as ficticious - before he "discovers" that his name and address are correct.

[When does this get put in Famous Dishes?]
"You are the son of an incestuous union." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Bst6OXEUg

User avatar
blueeyes_austin
Blue Eyed Devil
Posts: 3244
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:13 am

Post by blueeyes_austin » Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:44 pm

Ian_in_DC wrote:UYG.

Notice how Soda on pages 7-9 claims that this is a completely fabricated CV. It takes several days - after Soda discredits the entire work as ficticious - before he "discovers" that his name and address are correct.

[When does this get put in Famous Dishes?]


The thing I am wondering is, if it was fictitious and agents unknown put it up to discredit Soda's good name:

How did it get disappeared?

The only explanation that makes sense is that Soda put it up...and Soda removed it.
"We shall cause a distortionary response in US fiscal policy! God is great! God is great!"--Electrolyte channeling the 9/11 hijackers

User avatar
Wilster
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 8596
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:05 am

Post by Wilster » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:08 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:So this quote would be quite correct then, wouldn't it -


Another SoDuhism; "quite" correct? C'mon...there's been a few others in this very thread.
Scrubb makes note of my Stew and Thorn Tree posting history: I had no issues with what you said, the problem was that I couldn't figure out what it was (you said).

User avatar
Wilster
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 8596
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:05 am

Post by Wilster » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:20 pm

Wilster wrote:
Soda 2.0 wrote:Moe, whose latent (sic) psychosis has become so extreme (sic)...


SoDunce, I'm sorry I started this whole thing with your inability to write English, make a concise logically statement. I may be confused here; is SoDuh trying to promote that he understands English, or is he soliciting that he needs help with the latter?
Scrubb makes note of my Stew and Thorn Tree posting history: I had no issues with what you said, the problem was that I couldn't figure out what it was (you said).

User avatar
judik
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 20787
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:21 pm

Post by judik » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:21 pm

This OP is growing on me
You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.

Winston Churchill

User avatar
Wilster
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 8596
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:05 am

Post by Wilster » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:28 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:
I'm sorry I started this whole thing with your inability to write English, make a concise logically statement.


After that sentence, I think you should be sorry, bauble.


Really SoDunce? Any worse than this one:

Soda 2.0 wrote:You're a fucking imbecile, Wilster. Really, there are rodents out there who coule whip you at scrabble.

The bed frames were made of wood - that is what we slept on.


Okay, I could lean towards giving you the benefit of the doubt on the typo (even though you have not been so generous), but hey ol' bean, "Scrabble" is clearly capitalized and really SoDense, you never end a sentence with a preposition. Sure, we may do it with the spoken language, but not the written.

*this has been free English language tip for SoDuh number 237*
Scrubb makes note of my Stew and Thorn Tree posting history: I had no issues with what you said, the problem was that I couldn't figure out what it was (you said).

AnniesCat
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by AnniesCat » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:33 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:
you never end a sentence with a preposition.


Oh. My. God.


Unreal. Wilster is as thick as cow shit, confirmed.
Zara: "mods, have them remove the avatar or remove my original logo artwork from the stew forum site and my handle from this membership. "

Daejn
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 1033
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:34 pm

Post by Daejn » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:41 pm

Soda wrote:Often what looks like a preposition in an English sentence is really not a preposition but a part of the verb (the technical term is adverbial particle). Consider these verbs: to put, to put up, to put up with. Obviously these are not the same verbs, and equally obviously the words that look like familiar prepositions are actually a part of each of the last two verbs.


Fascinating.

User avatar
Wilster
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 8596
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:05 am

Post by Wilster » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:43 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:Wilster -

If you were a native speaker, you'd have known this, but since you aren't...

Often what looks like a preposition in an English sentence is really not a preposition but a part of the verb (the technical term is adverbial particle). Consider these verbs: to put, to put up, to put up with. Obviously these are not the same verbs, and equally obviously the words that look like familiar prepositions are actually a part of each of the last two verbs.

Do you really want to be so "correct" as to complain, "That is the sort of thing up with which I will not put!" (Winston Churchill once used a similar remark to mock someone who had criticized him for ending a sentence with a preposition.)

http://grammartips.homestead.com/prepositions1.html


For a super hero, you sure do make a strong case for finally realizing that your "latent/extreme" remark early in this thread really kinda discounted your thoughts on being a writer. Although, I'm sure there might be a spot for you as an ESL teacher; you should send out your CV one of these days and see how many hits you may get.

And *shudder* no penis talk; you're getting a lot better.
Scrubb makes note of my Stew and Thorn Tree posting history: I had no issues with what you said, the problem was that I couldn't figure out what it was (you said).

User avatar
blueeyes_austin
Blue Eyed Devil
Posts: 3244
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:13 am

Post by blueeyes_austin » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:45 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:Wilster -

If you were a native speaker, you'd have known this, but since you aren't...

Often what looks like a preposition in an English sentence is really not a preposition but a part of the verb (the technical term is adverbial particle). Consider these verbs: to put, to put up, to put up with. Obviously these are not the same verbs, and equally obviously the words that look like familiar prepositions are actually a part of each of the last two verbs.

Do you really want to be so "correct" as to complain, "That is the sort of thing up with which I will not put!" (Winston Churchill once used a similar remark to mock someone who had criticized him for ending a sentence with a preposition.)

http://grammartips.homestead.com/prepositions1.html


Fascinating and not his words, of course. A direct quote from the site.
"We shall cause a distortionary response in US fiscal policy! God is great! God is great!"--Electrolyte channeling the 9/11 hijackers

User avatar
Wilster
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 8596
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:05 am

Post by Wilster » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:46 pm

Daejn wrote:
Soda wrote:Often what looks like a preposition in an English sentence is really not a preposition but a part of the verb (the technical term is adverbial particle). Consider these verbs: to put, to put up, to put up with. Obviously these are not the same verbs, and equally obviously the words that look like familiar prepositions are actually a part of each of the last two verbs.


Fascinating.


Equally fascinating is that SoDense makes no effort to highlight the above passage as NOT being his. No quotes, no italics, no nothin'.
Scrubb makes note of my Stew and Thorn Tree posting history: I had no issues with what you said, the problem was that I couldn't figure out what it was (you said).

User avatar
blueeyes_austin
Blue Eyed Devil
Posts: 3244
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:13 am

Post by blueeyes_austin » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:47 pm

Wilster wrote:
Daejn wrote:
Soda wrote:Often what looks like a preposition in an English sentence is really not a preposition but a part of the verb (the technical term is adverbial particle). Consider these verbs: to put, to put up, to put up with. Obviously these are not the same verbs, and equally obviously the words that look like familiar prepositions are actually a part of each of the last two verbs.


Fascinating.


Equally fascinating is that SoDense makes no effort to highlight the above passage as NOT being his. No quotes, no italics, no nothin'.


Well, of course. That's Soda's MO--a complete lack of academic (or any other) integrity.
"We shall cause a distortionary response in US fiscal policy! God is great! God is great!"--Electrolyte channeling the 9/11 hijackers

User avatar
judik
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 20787
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:21 pm

Post by judik » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:47 pm

He can't seem to help himself
He deserves our pity,not our ridicule!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.

Winston Churchill

User avatar
Wilster
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 8596
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:05 am

Post by Wilster » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:51 pm

blueeyes_austin wrote:Well, of course. That's Soda's MO--a complete lack of academic (or any other) integrity.


To quote one of the most admired posters here, I think SoDuh was "frothing at the mouth," squirming in his seat, not able to type "preposition + sentence + end" into Google fast enough.
Scrubb makes note of my Stew and Thorn Tree posting history: I had no issues with what you said, the problem was that I couldn't figure out what it was (you said).

User avatar
blueeyes_austin
Blue Eyed Devil
Posts: 3244
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:13 am

Post by blueeyes_austin » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:51 pm

Oh, by the way, I'm glad Rosie saved this:

Ian (USA) is charged by The Soda (EU) with having made a series of boring statements about The Sodas origins and family, and is now asked to present evidence to back up those claims. Th court would also like to ask Moe (USA) to back-up said claims, and he may give evidence of Ian's behalf.

Whilst Ian's lawyers still argue against the death penalty, the court will order that as his claims are proven groundless, he will acknowledge that he is wrong, and to apologise to the forum for lying.

If he refuses to apologise, the case will end, and Ian will never get to see any of the evidence he so craves.

In return, I will post whatever personal info is necessary to refute Ian's claims.


You asked for it, bucko.
"We shall cause a distortionary response in US fiscal policy! God is great! God is great!"--Electrolyte channeling the 9/11 hijackers

User avatar
blueeyes_austin
Blue Eyed Devil
Posts: 3244
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:13 am

Post by blueeyes_austin » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:52 pm

Soda 2.0 wrote:
No quotes, no italics, no nothin'


The thing in blue is called A LINK, gentlemen.

But do keep dancing, by all means.


Er, a link does not absolve you from proper citation within the text. That's the sort of thing I would expect a kid in freshman PolySci 101 to know.
"We shall cause a distortionary response in US fiscal policy! God is great! God is great!"--Electrolyte channeling the 9/11 hijackers

Post Reply