Did you ever find that "rule" that you claimed I made the other day?R.Suave » 19 Apr 2024, 10:29 am » wrote: ↑ I'll apply the same rule.
It should write itself going forward.
Since you ran, crying, from the procedure, why are you whining about it now?*rippy38 » 19 Apr 2024, 10:35 am » wrote: ↑ Did you ever find that "rule" that you claimed I made the other day?
I haven't seen your example.Vegas » 19 Apr 2024, 10:34 am » wrote: ↑ I didn't break the rule, you have. If you have evidence that I habitually evade questions/demands the first from other members, then produce it.
Otherwise, I have not broken the rule.
Rule, Idiot, **** your ignorance, or 30k greenies.Vegas » 19 Apr 2024, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑ Rule idiot, **** your ignorance or 3k greenies.
What is survivorship bias in your words. And **** your incorrect definition.
Yes, we know.
How the **** are you going to do so?Vegas » 19 Apr 2024, 11:17 am » wrote: ↑ Yes, we know.
Ok ****. Repost your definition and I will tell you what is wrong with it. Since I don't stalk, I am not going to search around in your profile. So post it, unedited, coward.
R.Suave » 19 Apr 2024, 11:27 am » wrote: ↑ How the **** are you going to do so?
You can't be made to understand what it is.
How can I bluff?
Well...now you know how we feel when you demand us to repost things 100 times. Now it's your turn to take what you dish out.
I've already done so, twice.Vegas » 19 Apr 2024, 11:51 am » wrote: ↑ Well...now you know how we feel when you demand us to repost things 100 times. Now it's your turn to take what you dish out.
Repost it or stop asking me what's wrong with it.
Now!
R.Suave » 19 Apr 2024, 11:53 am » wrote: ↑ I've already done so, twice.
When are you going to post your example?