Liberal Forum

Huey » 23 Jan 2026, 10:51 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 10:51 am

If this is what you want to do to your thread, go for it.

It's what you wanted to do.

But you really can't be expected to admit that you're a credulous toady...
 

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 10:52 am

It's what you wanted to do.

But you really can't be expected to admit that you're a credulous toady...

Ok BV. Let's compare our definitions of Survivorship Bias and why yours is as useless as you. - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Deal:

Deal: Veghead claimed he already answered this question. LOL. If Veghead proves that he did indeed answer the survivorship multiple choice question below, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back. I am permabanned. Gone. Like a fart in the wind. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why.  His evidence must precede the timestamp upon when this challenge has been agreed upon by both parties. Moreover, he must answer immediately when the mods say "go," That next post. Not the next 600 posts. Either Cannon or Deezer mods.

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 10:52 am

It's what you wanted to do.

But you really can't be expected to admit that you're a credulous toady...
 

 

LMAO!

Vegas » 23 Jan 2026, 11:02 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:02 am

Ok BV. Let's compare our definitions of Survivorship Bias and why yours is as useless as you. - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Deal:


 

Did you unlock the door to your Safe Space?

Huey » 23 Jan 2026, 11:04 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:04 am

LMAO!

Do you deny it?
 
 

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 11:06 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:06 am

Did you unlock the door to your Safe Space?

Copies me. And the projection commences. Hi Mary  

So how many times can the forum expect you to copy everyone today? At least give us an estimate.  

Vegas » 23 Jan 2026, 11:07 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:07 am

Copies me. And the projection commences. Hi Mary  

So how many times can the forum expect you to copy everyone today? At least give us an estimate.

Is that "yes" or "no"?

Don't waste coozie's space.
 

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 11:12 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:12 am

Is that "yes" or "no"?

Don't waste coozie's space.

**** your questions. You don't answer my questions, so I owe you nothing. 

1. You know the drill: Pic...answer first time...prove a negative..etc...

Vegas » 23 Jan 2026, 11:14 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:14 am

**** your questions. You don't answer my questions, so I owe you nothing. 

1. You know the drill: Pic...answer first time...prove a negative..etc...

You don't answer my questions, so I owe you nothing. 

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 11:16 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:16 am

You don't answer my questions, so I owe you nothing.

Copies me again.        Always projecting. Always accusing others of what you are guilty of. 

textbook.

1. You will copy that ^^^

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 11:16 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:16 am

I am dumber than a box of rocks.

So seriously. How can you not figure out how to get passed the ban? It isn't rocket science. 

Here is a hint: When you finally figure it out, you will wonder why something so **** simple took you so damn long to figure out. 

You are an idiot. 

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 11:06 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:06 am

Do you deny it?
 
 

 

And you keep perpetuating the diversion.

Are you answering questions on a one for one basis?
 

Vegas » 23 Jan 2026, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 11:28 am

So seriously. How can you not figure out how to get passed the ban? It isn't rocket science. 

Here is a hint: When you finally figure it out, you will wonder why something so **** simple took you so damn long to figure out. 

You are an idiot.

@Blackvegetable  it doesn't matter. We both know what your response will be anyway. Even before you read it you know what you will say: ""This is **** ****." or "You are a **** idiot." 

Your usual level 0 response. You don't have the intellectual capacity to give a level 2+ rebuttal. 

Mrkelly » 23 Jan 2026, 9:38 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 9:38 am

that is another of my favorite parts

watching tRumpers defending their  ”stable genius “

Still butthurt the cock-gobbler got Hillaryized?

You had choices, you went for the 80/20 issue bumper, in other words, you're a simple jackass.

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 7:20 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 7:20 am

 White House Posts Altered Photo Showing Arrested Minnesota Protester Crying

The New York Times ran the image posted by Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, as well as the one posted by the White House through an A.I. detection system. It concluded that the White House’s version showed signs of manipulation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/22/us/p ... house.html

AI is trash.
 

Blackvegetable » 23 Jan 2026, 7:20 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2026, 7:20 am

 White House Posts Altered Photo Showing Arrested Minnesota Protester Crying

The New York Times ran the image posted by Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, as well as the one posted by the White House through an A.I. detection system. It concluded that the White House’s version showed signs of manipulation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/22/us/p ... house.html

Lying traitor pos!

ICE detention staff reported death of restrained man as a suicide


The statements to 911 operators the night Geraldo Lunas Campos died appear to conflict with an autopsy’s later finding of homicide, according to a recording of the call obtained by The Washington Post.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... 911-calls/

I DOTH PROTEST BLACK VEGGIE PING PONG.

Can we all just try to discuss things that matter? Like INFILTRATION?

In current 2026 reports and historical context, information regarding the infiltration of protests to influence public perception has been documented from multiple perspectives:
Documented Far-Right Infiltration Claims
Far-Right Extremists and Accelerationists: Leaked documents and intelligence reports have historically identified far-right extremists seeking to capitalize on unrest by attacking protesters or police to incite broader conflict. White supremacist groups have been reported using platforms like Telegram to encourage followers to carry out acts of violence during protests to discredit movements and accelerate government demise.
Incitement Tactics: Some analysis suggests political strategies may involve inciting protesters to appear as provocateurs who obstruct law enforcement, a tactic aimed at motivating a political base through the resulting "optics" of chaos.
Infiltration Narratives Surrounding Recent Protests (2025–2026)
Anti-Immigration/ICE Protests: During widespread demonstrations against the second Trump administration's immigration policies in early 2026, federal officials have raised concerns about "organized agitators" and "provocateurs" seeking to escalate tensions.
The "No Kings" Protests: In late 2025, during large-scale "No Kings" rallies, federal officials suggested that radical groups like Antifa might be embedding themselves to escalate violence, though critics often view these claims as a means to delegitimize the protests.
FBI Investigations: As of January 2026, the FBI has launched a nationwide review into the funding and organization of anti-ICE protests to determine if they are being criminally disrupted by paid actors or provocateurs.
Historical Context (January 6)
"Antifa Infiltration" Theories: Following the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, many Trump supporters claimed the violence was perpetrated by Antifa members masquerading as Trump supporters to make the movement "look bad".
Official Refutation: The FBI and other intelligence agencies found no credible evidence that Antifa or leftist groups infiltrated the Capitol riot to instigate violence. Investigations concluded the violence was primarily carried out by documented Trump supporters.

Poopoganda?

Official Refutation: The FBI and other intelligence agencies found no credible evidence that Antifa or leftist groups infiltrated the Capitol riot to instigate violence. Investigations concluded the violence was primarily carried out by documented Trump supporters.

As ICE arrests surged, Trump administration sought to cut bodycam program


A string of violent incidents has added fresh urgency to calls for more body-worn cameras. But DHS proposed reducing spending on them in its initial budget proposal.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigrat ... migration/