BRHornet45

[z0sa]

What relation does this have to the original point?

The only thing you're saying here is that winning gives you a basis to respond to the trolling.

[anakha]

He gets it.

Yet again, you're confusing the point.

Again, I'm cool with what BR does. It still doesn't mean that his post isn't trolling by the very definition itself.

[z0sa]

Yet again, you're confusing the point.

Again, I'm cool with what BR does. It still doesn't mean that his post isn't trolling by the very definition itself.

He doesn't get it.

[anakha]

Still waiting for an actual counterargument.

[anakha]

He doesn't get it.

Still waiting for an actual counterargument.

[z0sa]

Still waiting for an actual counterargument.

Ahem

I've already dismantled everything you had to say, called you a pussy, and made you my .

And it's only Game 1 of 82.

[anakha]

I've already dismantled everything you had to say, called you a pussy, and made you my .

And it's only Game 1 of 82.

And you resorting to ad hominem remarks only proves you have nothing to stand on.

[z0sa]

Anakha could be mentally challenged, no joke.

I mean, I even admitted I was trolling this whole time and he's still continued on and on. It's been a blast, thanks.

[anakha]

Anakha could be mentally challenged, no joke.

And you resorting to ad hominem remarks only proves you have nothing to stand on.

Still waiting.

[z0sa]

Still waiting.

What part of "I've already dismantled everything you had to say" don't you understand?

[LOL]

lol,anakha gettting owned

[anakha]

What part of "I've already dismantled everything you had to say" don't you understand?

Not even close.

Please, show your counterarguments to the following points:

1) A poster from one team goes to another team's message board to talk smack. That is trolling according to the definition of the word that I posted, because he intends to and gets responses to his smack talk. Your argument that being a fan of a team cannot be considered a sensitive topic (and therefore, a non-trollable one) is wrong, evidenced by the way some posters can and have responded to such smack talk.

2) You claim to be non-trollable. By the definition of the word, that implies you do not respond to trolling. But the fact that you have responded to BR's smack talk and your continued responses to Culburn's smack talk completely prove otherwise.

[z0sa]

Not even close.

Please, show your counterarguments to the following points:

1) A poster from one team goes to another team's message board to talk smack. That is trolling according to the definition of the word that I posted, because he intends to and gets responses to his smack talk. Your argument that being a fan of a team cannot be considered a sensitive topic (and therefore, a non-trollable one) is wrong, evidenced by the way some posters can and have responded to such smack talk.

2) You claim to be non-trollable. By the definition of the word, that implies you do not respond to trolling. But the fact that you have responded to BR's smack talk and your continued responses to Culburn's smack talk completely prove otherwise.

seriously, I've answered all your bull questions. Everyone besides you that has posted has said something along the lines I did. For some unknown reason, you attacked me because I said I'm the opposite of trollable weeks ago in a different forum while possibly being sarcastic and that for some reason offended you even though it has absolutely nothing to do with you, . I never even responded to Hornet's posts directly. Come down off your pedestal and enjoy a little smack talk, Mr. Sensitive.

[anakha]

seriously, I've answered all your bull questions. Everyone besides you that has posted has said something along the lines I did. For some unknown reason, you attacked me because I said I'm the opposite of trollable weeks ago in a different form while possibly being sarcastic and that for some reason offended you even though it has absolutely nothing to do with you, . I never even responded to Hornet's posts directly. Come down off your pedestal and enjoy a little smack talk, Mr. Sensitive.

So now you're backpedaling from your statement of being not trollable while vigorously defending it before, while refusing to provide any coherent or logical counterargument?

Suuuuuuure, you've won.

[z0sa]

So now you're backpedaling from your statement of being not trollable while vigorously defending it before, while refusing to provide any coherent or logical counterargument?

Suuuuuuure, you've won.

My god you're ing stupid. I've given you counterarguments, I've stated my case, everyone agrees that it was good natured smacktalk including BR, you're wrong period.

and why do you care if I'm trollable or not? I mean, its seriously ing creepy how much of an interest you have in me. I never vigorously defended myself, because I'm trolling an idiot. I have kept you on the defensive the entire time, because I'm so clearly right and supported by other posters its well, funny.

These last posts though, have been dead serious. I don't know what the is wrong with you.

[anakha]

My god you're ing stupid. I've given you counterarguments, I've stated my case, everyone agrees that it was good natured smacktalk including BR, you're wrong period.

and why do you care if I'm trollable or not? I mean, its seriously ing creepy how much of an interest you have in me. I never vigorously defended myself, because I'm trolling an idiot. I have kept you on the defensive the entire time, because I'm so clearly right and supported by other posters its well, funny.

These last posts though, have been dead serious. I don't know what the is wrong with you.

All you had to do was admit you weren't serious when you stated you weren't trollable, and I would have never responded.

You tried to defend your stance, and I supported what I said. Look at my post history and I've always done that.

And you're completely missing the point when you say that it's good-natured smack talk, therefore it isn't trolling. Prove the points I made above are wrong if you want to prove me wrong, or prove that my definition of the word is wrong, not by going in a completely different direction.

Resorting to ad hominem remarks for the past few pages isn't helping your case, either.

[z0sa]

All you had to do was admit you weren't serious when you stated you weren't trollable, and I would have never responded.

I don't have to defend anything I say without justifiable cause. Again, get off your high pedestal and come down to our level. I will continue by specifying exactly what I have already answered in this thread, with bewilderment since you seem to have missed it all while still responding to it.

You tried to defend your stance,

False and I answered why.

and I supported what I said.

You haven't supported anything you said, whatsoever, except for the one "I'm the opposite of trollable" comment. I have asked you to directly quote where I was trolled (mainly for personal laughter purposes), you have failed. Again, already said this.

Look at my post history

No thanks.

and you're completely missing the point when you say that it's good-natured smack talk, therefore it isn't trolling.

That's your opinion, great - but mine and the other posters in this thread and the other one have a much different one. Which is why I keep calling you dense: you can't see past your own inhibitions. Not my problem and I already said this in the thread.

Prove the points I made above are wrong if you want to prove me wrong, not by going in a completely different direction.

I already have earlier this thread ffs.

Repeat: What part of "I've already dismantled everything you had to say" don't you understand?

Your arguments are weak. You're asking me for more argumentation when I've already refuted what you had to say.

[anakha]

False and I answered why.

Good job proving that I am, indeed, the opposite of trollable.

You tried to refute what I said when I called out your contradictory statements. That's defending yourself.

You haven't supported anything you said, whatsoever, except for the one "I'm the opposite of trollable" comment. I have asked you to directly quote where I was trolled (mainly for personal laughter purposes), you have failed. Again, already said this.

I already supported everything, and even went out of my way to make everything easier for you to understand with my earlier post. Way to ignore the points I posted above.

That's your opinion, great - but mine and the other posters in this thread and the other one have a much different one. Which is why I keep calling you dense: you can't see past your own inhibitions. Not my problem and I already said this in the thread.

My opinion is based on a do ented definition of trolling, I've argued that smack talk instigated by another team's fan on a message board is trolling, and this argument is evidenced by the way smack talk by other teams' fans are made and responded to here.

All everybody else has been saying so far is that the smack talk is in good fun and lighthearted. That doesn't do a thing to disprove anything I've said because I haven't been arguing about the intention behind the post.

You keep insisting intention keeps BR's post from being trolling, I'm arguing content makes it so. It painted the Spurs negatively and was made to incite Spurs fans to react.

Once again, I'm cool with BR making that post. I don't mind his smack talk. I even would have responded myself. But it still doesn't make his original post not trolling, according to the definition.

I already have earlier this thread ffs.

Then if you're really convinced you're right, actually make a post outlining your counterargument and prove my statements wrong. Don't keep claiming you've already done so, as it makes you look like you're evading.

[Strokin3's]

LMAO at this silly little bas sons

I am sorry. I didn't notice that you have "always made it clear" that your #1 team is the Pistons.... its kinda hard to notice anything about 36 ing post son. I can dish it out, but can't take it? really??? ... If I couldn't take it then I wouldn't have came back on to this message board. I can take it, but I'm not gonna let some bandwagon jumping "2 favorite teams" newbie talk ridiculous smack.

So what I am a new guy, you were once a new guy too. Whats wrong with having 2 favorite teams. Do you not like 2 different flavors of ice cream? 2 different body types of women? You must be a pretty bland guy if you just like "1" of everything. By the way, who is the guy in your avatar? I will never be a bandwagon cat, I am sure you remember that teal days of Pistons basketball?!?! I throw up in my mouth sometimes just thinking of that era, but I stuck with my team through thick and thin and always will. Go Pistons!! Go Spurs!!

[LOL texans]

the hornets

[symple19]

Hey BR what happened to your Hornets? You talked a lot of trash before the game, how do you feel now? The Spurs are for real. Tune in next season when the Spurs are having their ring ceremony. Go Pistons!! Go Spurs!!!

Son, BRhornet is good people --- Ease back