What the literal fuck? I never did this. I'm getting seriously frustrated at how much of a fucking chronic liar you are and it's borderline trolling at this point because you just make up random shit and laugh and say "THIS PROVES YOU'RE CONTRADICTING YOURSELF" and I just get so pissed off with you because you're basically the guy that claims you have a contradiction in your garage
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
In post 3619, Kublai Khan wrote:Well, if mandates of heaven are only given to those who support the correct path and I was given a mandate of heaven, then you must admit that you are not the follower of the correct path and I am. Iron-clad.
The correct path states that order is good. Do you accept this? If not, you can't possibly be a follower and must be lying about your mandate.
The correct path states that chaos is good. If you don't accept this then you're not a follower and your mandate is false.
No it doesn't.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
In post 3619, Kublai Khan wrote:Well, if mandates of heaven are only given to those who support the correct path and I was given a mandate of heaven, then you must admit that you are not the follower of the correct path and I am. Iron-clad.
The correct path states that order is good. Do you accept this? If not, you can't possibly be a follower and must be lying about your mandate.
The correct path states that chaos is good. If you don't accept this then you're not a follower and your mandate is false.
In post 3619, Kublai Khan wrote:Well, if mandates of heaven are only given to those who support the correct path and I was given a mandate of heaven, then you must admit that you are not the follower of the correct path and I am. Iron-clad.
The correct path states that order is good. Do you accept this? If not, you can't possibly be a follower and must be lying about your mandate.
The correct path states that chaos is good. If you don't accept this then you're not a follower and your mandate is false.
No it doesn't.
Yes it does.
Where is your proof?
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
In post 3569, Accountant wrote:I have plenty of self-awareness, and all those other behaviors are indicative of PCs, not NPCs. NPCs do things like stumble or falter, they waver in their path, their personality develops, they grow as characters. PCs do not. PCs walk a single, unwavering path that is absolutely straight and true, a one-dimensional pawn of the correct path. Compare the amount of "variation" or "growth" or "acknowledgement of new ideas" shown by Frodo vs Merry/Pippin/Sam/Gandalf/Aragon.
The others are characters. Frodo is a "hero". He is just a machine whose function is to drop the Ring into the fires of Mount Doom.
Didn't you one admit that you don't read any story where they deviate from simplistic "hero wins" methodology?
In post 3619, Kublai Khan wrote:Well, if mandates of heaven are only given to those who support the correct path and I was given a mandate of heaven, then you must admit that you are not the follower of the correct path and I am. Iron-clad.
The correct path states that order is good. Do you accept this? If not, you can't possibly be a follower and must be lying about your mandate.
The correct path states that chaos is good. If you don't accept this then you're not a follower and your mandate is false.
In post 3579, Accountant wrote:I'm not surprised that [Accountant] is annoyed. People always get annoyed when faced with truths that they do not believe.
Last edited by Annadog40 on Sun Apr 30, 2017 4:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
This is my life now
Once you have 100 posts, click here to go to the page to join the speakeasy group.
In post 3619, Kublai Khan wrote:Well, if mandates of heaven are only given to those who support the correct path and I was given a mandate of heaven, then you must admit that you are not the follower of the correct path and I am. Iron-clad.
The correct path states that order is good. Do you accept this? If not, you can't possibly be a follower and must be lying about your mandate.
The correct path states that chaos is good. If you don't accept this then you're not a follower and your mandate is false.
In post 3630, Kublai Khan wrote:Didn't you one admit that you don't read any story where they deviate from simplistic "hero wins" methodology?
BTW, I never read the "Lord of the Rings".
Eh, I don't blame you, it's draggy in some areas.
As for the first, I do read stories that deviate, but I sure as fuck don't pattern my life, or my realities, around them.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
I don't need proof. My arguments are self-evident. Yours are not.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
That is not proof that I said that the correct path is a shield for liars. In the quote, ir specifically says:
Paraconsistent thinking is not a shield for liars.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
In post 3638, Shaziro wrote:My opinion is fact. If you can claim that, so can I, right?
You can't. I can. I am God.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
I don't need proof. My arguments are self-evident. Yours are not.
My mandate is more true then anything that could be called self-evident. Yours are false because my mandate is true. Chaos is better. I know I'm correct so that means you are wrong. This is my proof. You have no proof, therefore that re-asserts that I am right. Change your ways to become more moral.
They can disagree all they like. In the end, I know I am correct.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
In post 3642, Kublai Khan wrote:My mandate is more true then anything that could be called self-evident. Yours are false because my mandate is true. Chaos is better. I know I'm correct so that means you are wrong. This is my proof. You have no proof, therefore that re-asserts that I am right. Change your ways to become more moral.
Wrong. It can't be true, because it contradicts the truth, hence it is false. You "knowing"(ie. thinking) you are correct doesn't change the fact that you are wrong. You have no proof; I am beyond the need for proof. The fact that I don't need proof is itself proof I am right.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
In post 3644, Annadog40 wrote:Will you tell them? Cause otherwise I am inclined to belive that dirt is the self-evident truth.
I don't have an account on those forums.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
Solid evidence. Dirt is chaotic and therefore good.
Dirt is neither inherently chaotic nor inherently orderly, but if it was inherently chaotic it would be bad.
There's nothing that says that a fake can't beat the real thing.
You must not imagine that for beings like you and us there can be laughter. The low men laugh, and we envy them. But for us, the higher ones, there is no laughter, only an unending vigil, purely serious, stretching on into the night.
That is not proof that I said that the correct path is a shield for liars. In the quote, ir specifically says:
Paraconsistent thinking is not a shield for liars.
I never claimed you said the "correct path" is a shield for liars. I claimed you said that "paraconsistent thinking" is a shield for liars. Which you did. Stop trying to lie about what I said, it looks really bad for your whole "I'm morally superior" lie.
