Forbes active over Murray?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

:rolleyes I hope Murray doesn't think like you do. That Kyle "Molasses" Anderson can be as good on that end as he is takes a number of mental tricks and a great feel for the game on that end. You better believe Murray could stand to learn from Slowmo.

---

slomo has a high basketball IQ if nothing else. and that's not discounting the value of such an asset, either.

Slomo does not have a high bbiq faggot. :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

Slomo does not have a high bbiq faggot. :lmao

---

Why do you just go around posting garabage and calling everyone fa**ot? It's annoying as hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPG21920

Why do you just go around posting garabage and calling everyone fa**ot? It's annoying as hell.

---

fag discourse typically suggests a self-assurance of one's masculinity (usually associated with adolescents in high school). the more one uses it the more that individual requires such assurance. either that, or a very limited vocabulary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

fag discourse typically suggests a self-assurance of one's masculinity (usually associated with adolescents in high school). the more one uses it the more that individual requires such assurance. either that, or a very limited vocabulary.

---

My vocabulary is higher than yours, faggot. :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPG21920

Why do you just go around posting garabage and calling everyone fa**ot? It's annoying as hell.

---

You don't need to read it. :lol :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

fag discourse typically suggests a self-assurance of one's masculinity (usually associated with adolescents in high school). the more one uses it the more that individual requires such assurance. either that, or a very limited vocabulary.

---

You used the word incorrectly, and then the post was deleted. MOD? :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

My vocabulary is higher than yours, faggot. :lmao

---

i was just making a generalized observation; only you would know if it was tautological.

And then you post the comment. :wow



:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

i was just making a generalized observation; only you would know if it was tautological.

---

FYI, you're using the word wrong. :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

You used the word incorrectly, and then the post was deleted. MOD? :lol

---

what word? antecedent?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

what word? antecedent?

---

tautological

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

And then you post the comment. :wow



:lol

---

now that's tautology in the grammatical sense (the first one, by the way, was tautology as in formal logic).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

tautological

---

do i really have to be didactic about this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

now that's tautology in the grammatical sense (the first one, by the way, was tautology as in formal logic).

---

Doesn't matter what form. You're using it wrong. And I'm not gonna be an english teacher and solve that for you. :lol

And by the way, unless there was a skip in the matrix, you somehow deleted your earlier comment. MOD MUCH? :lmao

I have a reply from you on my replies tab, but you deleted your comment. :lol

Hey dude can you bold me? K thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

Doesn't matter what form. You're using it wrong. And I'm not gonna be an english teacher and solve that for you. :lol

---

i simply made an observation of your propensity to engage in fag discourse, which is just a sociologically observed pattern among high school boys. you retorted with fag discourse. my initial observation was merely generalized. whether or not, in your case, the statement "dabom engages in fag discourse because he is deficient in his masculinity" is true in every possible interpretation (i.e., tautological) is only something you would know.

Again, you're using it wrong. :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

Again, you're using it wrong. :lmao

---

well you can take it up with wittgenstein or quine if you're convinced of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjv

well you can take it up with wittgenstein or quine if you're convinced of that.

---

This guy is a MOD.

You can tell when he completely ignores the assertion. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

This guy is a MOD.

You can tell when he completely ignores the assertion. :lol

---

see now that proposition is not tautological. it just begs the question.

I take that back.

I have evidence because it shows you replied on my "replies tab". :lol

Keep sweating. :lol