If you know Uwe Boll, or someone who knows him, or etc...

Double-S- · Post by **Double-S-** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 5:24 pm

Have him directed to this website: http://www.uweboll.com/

VGJustice · Post by **VGJustice** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 5:33 pm

Bitter?

DarkPrime · Post by **DarkPrime** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 5:38 pm

Golden. I hate that guy.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:02 pm

Not to defend the indefensible, but no one says you have to watch his movies.

Double-S- · Post by **Double-S-** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 11:27 am

Just because you don't watch them, doesn't stop them from existing.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:28 pm

And just because they exist doesn't mean they have a/n (noticeable) impact on you or other people.

Grow up, there are always going to be bad (fill in the blank). Just ignore it and move like the rest of the world. Unless you have a specific complaint, it really isn't all that interesting of a topic. What is there to contribute? "Yeah that guy sucks alright."

Post by **Segaholic2** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:31 pm

You're an idiot. I hate scientologists and I've never been in their damned church.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:55 pm

I would say you are the idiot since you are bothered by things that don't affect you. I mean let's face it, you are the one wasting your own time and energy holding an irrational view about something that you are ignorant about and something that you don't even have to deal with.

Post by **Segaholic2** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:58 pm

Do you even know anything about scientology? I can't see how you can't hate them if you have the faintest idea of what they do, even if it "doesn't affect you".

Also, I'm insulted that you'd say that I'm ignorant about a subject that I've actually researched enough to know how much I should hate it. Who's making ignorant assumptions now?

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:13 pm

You hate scientologists? How utterly Christian of you.

Anyway, it's pretty stupid in my veiw to say a religious cult is analagous to movies that aren't entertaining.

And you're insulted that I called you ignorant when you weren't? Did you think you might be insulting me by calling me an idiot (when I'm not) just because you disagreed with my argument? I'll take ignorant assumptions, but you get hypocracy. How's that?

Double-S- · Post by **Double-S-** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:16 pm

If everybody had Chris's mentality, there'd be no such thing as law.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:18 pm

I pass on my "ignorant assumptions" badge to Double-S-. I think he deserves it more.

SuperKnux · Post by **SuperKnux** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:19 pm

Del leaves, and look what happens. Chie-whawha.

j-man · Post by **j-man** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:19 pm

Thus proving she truly is the glue that holds our fragile community together.

Double-S- · Post by **Double-S-** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:20 pm

I'm not assuming your opinion. I just read it.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:21 pm

Tell me where my opinion is that laws shouldn't exist, and I'll retract my statement in full and never disagree with anyone on this forum or any other again.

Double-S- · Post by **Double-S-** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:22 pm

Good job at reading. I never said you said laws shouldn't exist. I said if everyone thought like you, there wouldn't be law.

Also, law might be slightly wrong. Law enforcers is more appropriate.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:02 pm

Well let me make it simple for you sir. I support law enforcement, so your statement makes no sense and must be based on false precepts, or rather ignorant assumptions.

Omni Hunter · Post by **Omni Hunter** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:21 pm

If everyone supports law enforcement as you have put it then everyone would be against crime which leads to no need for law or law enforcement to control crime as it would be non-existent.
All you have done is backed up Double-S- with that last statement.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:32 pm

Except for the fact that if everyone had my mentality, then everyone wouldn't trust anyone else and we would have law enforcement anyway. It would probably be better for you to stay out of this. It was funny enough when one person thought they knew me well enough to make generalizations about the entire planet, but it's getting stupid now that two people think they can do it.

Omni Hunter · Post by **Omni Hunter** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:40 pm

Maybe so, but what I see on this thread is more than two people making generalisations of you and the planet, not that it makes much difference.
And yeah, maybe it is better for me to stay out of this but I couldn't really care and I admit that I'm wrong in doing so.
It just so happens that people who don't like to admit or say they are wrong gets to me as it causes so much aggro.

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:45 pm

I'm wrong for saying that Double-S- made a gross assumption about what he thinks my mentality is when his basis is about 1500 messages on a video game forum? Or was I wrong for thinking that he shouldn't complain about media that is not entertaining when he doesn't have to watch it? Or was I wrong to say that his brother was a hypocrite for being "insulted" when I made a harsh judgment, but when he himself started his own post with a direct flame merely because he disagreed with me? Or was I wrong when I didn't throw crime and religious cults in with movies that, by opinion alone, suck?

Please Omni, tell me what I did wrong, and I will gladly apologize so I can stop "getting to you."

Omni Hunter · Post by **Omni Hunter** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:59 pm

Dude, your a sound guy but it's the fact that you never back down which is good but causes aggrivation sometimes, especially when the arguement was over crap movies that no-one has to watch.
You aren't wrong in your posts at all, just a little stalwart.

Baba O'Reily · Post by **Baba O'Reily** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:35 pm

I propose that we settle this dispute with a rousing match of Tiddlywinks.

Double-S- · Post by **Double-S-** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:01 pm

Double-S- wrote:Good job at reading. I never said you said laws shouldn't exist. I said if everyone thought like you, there wouldn't be law.

Also, law might be slightly wrong. Law enforcers is more appropriate.

chriscaffee wrote:Well let me make it simple for you sir. I support law enforcement, so your statement makes no sense and must be based on false precepts, or rather ignorant assumptions.

Once again, you fail at reading. I seem to remember having to mention the same thing in an old argument. You should work on that, and that is one thing I know with absolute certainty about you now.

I said, if everyone thinks like you, there wouldn't be law enforcement. That does not imply that I imply that you do not support law enforcement. Can you comprehend that?

Since I'm not sure if you can, I must elaborate. Let me put it straight.

You believe that if something doesn't affect you, then you shouldn't give a damn. So, if everyone thought like that, then no one would care enough about other people's problems to go around trying to fix them. Simple.