BlackvegetableBlackvegetable » 28 Jan 2026, 6:31 am » wrote: ↑ Post my words, not your narrative.
You know the drill...
Child Groomer, Sexual PredatorPosts: 47,941Contact:
No....that doesn't prove ****...Huey » 13 Jan 2026, 10:43 am » wrote: ↑
13 Jan 2026, 10:43 am
You lists of quotes you posted recently from threads that no longer exist proves it. Some are 8 years old.
A dozen of your greatest hits....hardly a "data base".Huey » 28 Jan 2026, 7:09 am » wrote: ↑ Blackvegetable
Child Groomer, Sexual PredatorPosts: 47,941Contact:
Contact BlackvegetableMoney: 1,231,580
![]()
No....that doesn't prove ****...
It means I have a collection of about a dozen of your greatest hits which, due to your promiscuity with respect to Stupid, is far from exhaustive....
I started keeping them because you not only run from your words, you lie about them....
viewtopic.php?p=2840094#p2840094
That says file. It has data in your file but my the post you responded to says FILE. What did you say about narratives? You lose every time!Blackvegetable » 28 Jan 2026, 6:31 am » wrote: ↑Post my words, not your narrative.Huey » 28 Jan 2026, 6:24 am » wrote: ↑ I doubt that. I don't have a file with quotes from and screen shots of your posts. You have already admitted it.
Still whining about greenies and reddies. What a ******.
You know the drill...
Blackvegetable » 28 Jan 2026, 7:17 am » wrote: ↑A dozen of your greatest hits....hardly a "data base".Huey » 28 Jan 2026, 7:09 am » wrote: ↑ Blackvegetable
Child Groomer, Sexual PredatorPosts: 47,941Contact:
Contact BlackvegetableMoney: 1,231,580
![]()
No....that doesn't prove ****...
It means I have a collection of about a dozen of your greatest hits which, due to your promiscuity with respect to Stupid, is far from exhaustive....
I started keeping them because you not only run from your words, you lie about them....
viewtopic.php?p=2840094#p2840094
And again, you never hesitate to retell events of yesteryear...stuff you invent for any occasion.
I quote you verbatim....and you demand links.
Because your recall sucks.
Btw, where did I mention reddies or greenies?
You have used many words.
Blackvegetable » 28 Jan 2026, 7:22 am » wrote: ↑ You have used many words.
The fact remains
You retell
I quote, verbatim.
A "file"?Huey » 28 Jan 2026, 7:29 am » wrote: ↑ I just quoted YOU, verbatim and in context. Facts are facts. You maintain a FILE with partial quotes, out of context, and personal info.
LMAO! He says he doesn't have a file but admits he has a file. Strange.Blackvegetable » 28 Jan 2026, 7:33 am » wrote: ↑ A "file"?
No.
Don't flatter yourself.
I realized that there was no point, you'll repeat any idiocy in time, so I rarely add to it....the most recent was your admission that "define woman" is ****.
Thanks.
Define "file".Huey » 28 Jan 2026, 7:36 am » wrote: ↑ LMAO! He says he doesn't have a file but admits he has a file. Strange.
Yes, but anything purged is going to have no snapback.
Cannonpointer » 28 Jan 2026, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑ Yes, but anything purged is going to have no snapback.
Again, the "no snapback" part of your indictment is almost certainly not at his door.
The "file"Cannonpointer » 28 Jan 2026, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑ Yes, but anything purged is going to have no snapback.
He seems to have obviated his own complaint with his own complaint.Blackvegetable » 28 Jan 2026, 9:36 am » wrote: ↑ The "file"
Your welcome for the english lesson.
I had to lie to do it, but hey, I get to do that for a living.
I repeat slogans.
I don't care about frequency. 4 of the last 8 winners were from small countries. THat is the point.
Don't bother if it is going to be from behind. It could be anyone.
Your context is irrelevant.
If you are going to get all personal, as is your tactic, there is no need to continue
I have disputed objective fact.
Note that it doesn't include any personal information.
That is among my faves...Cannonpointer » 28 Jan 2026, 9:41 am » wrote: ↑ He seems to have obviated his own complaint with his own complaint.
Huey, YOU are the one who insisted that context is irrelevant.
Looks to me like he has you by the short hairs.
What you are not getting is he was posting them WITHOUT the snapback BEFORE the purge.Cannonpointer » 28 Jan 2026, 9:35 am » wrote: ↑ Again, the "no snapback" part of your indictment is almost certainly not at his door.
Damn. The scoundrel!Huey » 28 Jan 2026, 10:05 am » wrote: ↑ What you are not getting is he was posting them WITHOUT the snapback BEFORE the purge.
I commit outrages you didn't even know were outrages...
Blackvegetable » 28 Jan 2026, 11:15 am » wrote: ↑ I commit outrages you didn't even know were outrages...
Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?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.