Jump to content

LETS LIST EM SHALL WE??

janetDAYZ

By janetDAYZ
in Free Xone

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 397
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Reyna ♔ Advanced Member

Reyna ♔

Posted
Posted

I've noticed from my years on arguments on the web, when the gals pull out the gifs, it's a sign of defeat. You have nothing to rebuttal because you know everything I'm saying is valid. :lmao: @ you still cosigning yourself. Pathetic.

Now let me go finish listening to "Kitty Kat", where Beyonce snatches the cat back. It makes me emotional, so it has depth. :thumbup:

:lmao: @ you using a gif I made too. Girl! :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Actually I pulled these out because your argument gets more and more ridiculous as it drags on. Once you understood that you couldn't come for my logic, you instead shifted to me instead. Your first fail. You had more keys than a piano in that post. OBVIOUSLY because your argument lacks. NOTHING you said was valid and EVERYTHING you came with, I ripped to shreds. That gets boring as hell after a while.

I don't need to co-sign myself. Others did it for me :coffee:

WEAK.AS.FUCK. :lmao:

Regaardless of who made it, I used it better and properly. Any more from the defense, darling? :coffee:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Wonder Advanced Member

Mr. Wonder

Posted
Posted

Would you like me to? I left out of boredom with your ridiculous points. I don't mind adding more wigs to my collection :coffee:

You did put a nice argument but you failed a number of times:

  • Believing that "depth" and "meaning" are two vastly separate entities
  • Pushing your own definition of "depth" (perhaps your biggest fail)
  • Focusing on the wrong aspect(s) of my argument to counter attack
  • Cosigning yourself (it doesn't make false statements true)
  • Trying to tell someone their opinion is wrong (where's the logic in that?)

I could offer you some pointers for next time if you like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Wonder Advanced Member

Mr. Wonder

Posted
Posted

Actually I pulled these out because your argument gets more and more ridiculous as it drags on. Once you understood that you couldn't come for my logic, you instead shifted to me instead. Your first fail. You had more keys than a piano in that post. OBVIOUSLY because your argument lacks. NOTHING you said was valid and EVERYTHING you came with, I ripped to shreds. That gets boring as hell after a while.

I don't need to co-sign myself. Others did it for me :coffee:

WEAK.AS.FUCK. :lmao:

Regaardless of who made it, I used it better and properly. Any more from the defense, darling? :coffee:

*see above post*

I don't need to co-sign myself.

NOTHING you said was valid and EVERYTHING you came with, I ripped to shreds.

Untitled79-vi.gif

You girls lose every time! :lmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reyna ♔ Advanced Member

Reyna ♔

Posted
Posted

You did put a nice argument but you failed a number of times:

  • Believing that "depth" and "meaning" are two vastly separate entities
  • Pushing your own definition of "depth" (perhaps your biggest fail)
  • Focusing on the wrong aspect(s) of my argument to counter attack
  • Cosigning yourself (it doesn't make false statements true)
  • Trying to tell someone their opinion is wrong (where's the logic in that?)

I could offer you some pointers for next time if you like.

1. Depth and meaning are two different things. They relate somewhat, but they are different and you were arguing for meaning. You went with an if-then factor that derailed you. Meaning is subjective, depth is not. Meaning is idealistic, depth is concrete.

2.Based on the agreements by the rest, many would concur that the definition was on point.

3. I covered that in the later parts. Example: You suggested TE, I shattered that.

4. Apparently you didn't see the others agreeing with me. I didn't have to co-sign myself, least of all in an attempt to strengthen my argument. My points stood firm.

5. Opinions can be wrong. Though everybody has one, they can be wrong. Yours was.

No need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThatOtherFan Advanced Member

ThatOtherFan

Posted
Posted

*see above post*

Untitled79-vi.gif

You girls lose every time! :lmao:

She RIPPED you to shreds and you know it Austineisha! :rolleyes:

You are still trying to collect pieces of your wig off the ground.

You are just a tirelesss debator that has to win..luckily I didn't get involved or your wig would have been completely disintegrated. :coffee:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Wonder Advanced Member

Mr. Wonder

Posted
Posted

1. Depth and meaning are two different things. They relate somewhat, but they are different and you were arguing for meaning. You went with an if-then factor that derailed you. Meaning is subjective, depth is not. Meaning is idealistic, depth is concrete.

2.Based on the agreements by the rest, many would concur that the definition was on point.

3. I covered that in the later parts. Example: You suggested TE, I shattered that.

4. Apparently you didn't see the others agreeing with me. I didn't have to co-sign myself, least of all in an attempt to strengthen my argument. My points stood firm.

5. Opinions can be wrong. Though everybody has one, they can be wrong. Yours was.

No need.

Like I said, depth and meaning are pretty much one in the same. If I asked you why a song like Janet's "Truth" is deep, you'd explain the MEANING of the song. That's why you lose there.

And YOUR definition of one having depth was "emotional root and value". There's more than one emotion. So based on your definition if a song makes a listener feel happy, sad, angry, uplifted, etc, then those songs have depth. That's why you don't win there either.

You brought up Mariah's "Hero" and said it has depth. I can easily say that song has no depth and it's bland. That doesn't mean you're right and I'm wrong. There's no right or wrong, because it's an opinion. You lose a third time.

And the only person agreeing with you was TOF. You don't know him, and Henri will tel you this, ANYTIME me or Henri are in a debate, TOF will come in disagree just to have an argument or steadily cosign the person Henri or I am debating with. Lo and behold, Henri's point is validated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Wonder Advanced Member

Mr. Wonder

Posted
Posted

She RIPPED you to shreds and you know it Austineisha! :rolleyes:

You are still trying to collect pieces of your wig off the ground.

You are just a tirelesss debator that has to win..luckily I didn't get involved or your wig would have been completely disintegrated. :coffee:

And you wonder why Henri and I ignore you so much. You try too hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThatOtherFan Advanced Member

ThatOtherFan

Posted
Posted

And the only person agreeing with you was TOF. You don't know him, and Henri will tel you this, ANYTIME me or Henri are in a debate, TOF will come in disagree just to have an argument or steadily cosign the person Henri or I am debating with. Lo and behold, Henri's point is validated.

That is NOT true! Hendrika says this to try to discredit me, but it's NOT true...AT ALL! :sigh:

Also, SOB and others agreed with her too. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Wonder Advanced Member

Mr. Wonder

Posted
Posted

That is NOT true! Hendrika says this to try to discredit me, but it's NOT true...AT ALL! :sigh:

Also, SOB and others agreed with her too. :rolleyes:

No, I don't...I just enough. B)

You two ignore me just to be mean and hateful! :umm::tear:

You do it all the time. You sit and cosign and post those stupid gifs and it just becomes annoying. That's why Henri's constantly puts you on ignore. I don't put you, or anyone, on ignore cuz I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. SOB. Please. He's been "Anti-Time Flies" ever since last year. He doesn't count.

And just for shits and giggles, I asked three different ppl on Twitter to read my posts to make sure I was making sense, and they all agreed with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reyna ♔ Advanced Member

Reyna ♔

Posted
Posted

Like I said, depth and meaning are pretty much one in the same. If I asked you why a song like Janet's "Truth" is deep, you'd explain the MEANING of the song. That's why you lose there.

And YOUR definition of one having depth was "emotional root and value". There's more than one emotion. So based on your definition if a song makes a listener feel happy, sad, angry, uplifted, etc, then those songs have depth. That's why you don't win there either.

You brought up Mariah's "Hero" and said it has depth. I can easily say that song has no depth and it's bland. That doesn't mean you're right and I'm wrong. There's no right or wrong. You lose a third time.

And the only person agreeing with you was TOF. You don't know him, and Henri will tel you this, ANYTIME me or Henri are in a debate, TOF will come in disagree just to have an argument or steadily cosign the person Henri or I am debating with. Lo and behold, Henri's point is validated.

Meaning OF THE SONG. Root OF THE SONG. Not how it relates to the listener. That's where you confused my argument with your own. If I commented on her song, it'd be about the lyrics, what message she is trying to deliver, how she is doing it, was it effective. Once again, re-read my posts. Just because one person may feel an emotional connection to the song and the other doesn't, does not imply that is lacks depth.

My argument is the SONG ITSELF having emotional root and value. Not how the listener feels about it. It implies that it's MEANING is relative to the listener. Not that the song can't stand for depth on its own.

I didn't lose anything. You feel no meaning to it, probably because it's her. But that doesn't change the fact that the song has a deep meaning to it or touches on a solid subject. You can have an opinion, of course. Looking at the lyrics of certain songs like Hero, or Again, or I Will Always Love You, even if a person doesn't like the artist or style and therefore will feel no connection, can see that the songs have depth based on content alone. Once again, Meaning=relative, depth=concrete.

S.O.B. agreed with me, too. My brother wasn't the only one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThatOtherFan Advanced Member

ThatOtherFan

Posted
Posted

You do it all the time. You sit and cosign and post those stupid gifs and it just becomes annoying. That's why Henri's constantly puts you on ignore.

No, I don't. There have been PLENTY of times I "co-signed" either yours or Henrietta's posts.

The three of us do disagree frequently which leads to our debates...all three of us LOVE to debate and get the last word, hence our fights that go on for 862 pages. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I don't put you, or anyone, on ignore cuz I don't want to hurt anyone's your feelings.

I KNEW you loved me! :wub: :wub: :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThatOtherFan Advanced Member

ThatOtherFan

Posted
Posted

SOB. Please. He's been "Anti-Time Flies" ever since last year. He doesn't count.

And just for shits and giggles, I asked three different ppl on Twitter to read my posts to make sure I was making sense, and they all agreed with me.

You edited you post and added the parts above... :rolleyes:

Nonetheless, he agreed with her. :coffee:

I'm not here for you getting your followers and stans to look your posts. They are non-factors. :coffee:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...