MEANINGS

[FRANKENSTEIN]

Anyone here have any balls to debate Me ?
Without any "Blocking" Bullshit ???
Come on !! Let's once & for all SETTLE the matter !

[eric]

OK, throwing it right back at you since you appear to be interested in definitions. Your answer to this question determines whether or not I debate you, ignore you, or just plain mock you. Using Dietrich Bonhoeffer's theory of stupidity which category do you feel you belong to: stupid, ignorant, or simply whimsical?
http://southsidemessenger.com/bonhoeffe ... ire-quote/
... eagerly awaiting your answer.....

[wserra]

Anyone here have any balls to debate Me ?

Debate you about what? It's like dealing with a four-year-old.

By the way, pick a place and post something once. Duplicates will be deleted.

[wserra]

Dietrich Bonhoeffer's theory of stupidity

Even better than Bonhoeffer's theory is Schiller's conclusion: "Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens." ("Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.")

[AndyK]

Do we need to warm up the crickets? They're still hibernating.

[Pottapaug1938]

Anyone here have any balls to debate Me ?
Without any "Blocking" Bullshit ???
Come on !! Let's once & for all SETTLE the matter !

If we had nothing better to do, and were willing to debate you, we would insist that the debate be one of mutual respect -- something sorely lacking in your previous attempts to "debate" -- if I can dignify those attempts thus. You would have to get to the point of your premise, and not ask vague, open-ended questions which allowed you to twist any responses to yield your desired income. You would have to not play "word games." You would have to deal in facts.

I am fully confident that I will not have to participate in any further "debates" with you.

[NYGman]

He tried this with me on PMs. Don't think he read a word I typed, and if he did he certainly didn't understand it, and just kept repeating himself over and over, as if repeating it enough times makes it true. I don't think he understands debate, doesn't get that an argument is an intellectual process. and that Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says. His debate consists of "No it isn't" over and over again. It was funny when MP did it, its not funny here.

[eric]

Did the same with me on PM's as well. Same question that he asked in public and had ignored the answers he received. Not worth my time to engage with somebody who can't/won't accept a reply he disagrees with.

Sent: Mon Oct 24, 2022 4:35 pm
From: FRANKENSTEIN
Recipient: eric

Just as I thought !! Crickets is all I hear from you chickenshits ! Tell Me ! Does the term "trade or business" according to the INTENT of the Law by the Definition , EXCLUDE "performance of the functions of a Public Office" !!?????????

[Pottapaug1938]

Frankie must have PM'd all of us. I got the same repeated idiocies from him.

[Burnaby49]

I feel slighted. He's never PM'd me. Not that that's a belated invitation.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I feel slighted. He's never PM'd me. Not that that's a belated invitation.

Are you sure you just didn't automatically delete it? Even I got one last October. Exact same message as Eric's.

[NYGman]

Makes sense, he probably sent the same replies to all of us, not even changing it to address the points we were making. I gave up. Although I do believe he tried to send me one last email, but seems stuck in his outbox. Oh well, likely garbage anyway. Based on his emails I can tell you he really has no clue what trade or business or what is meant by the performance of the functions of a Public Office. Apparently the Cleaners in the Mayors office are performing the functions of public office, who knew.

[The Observer]

I got PMs from him back in October after I had told him on a thread that a question he had asked was meaningless due to him agreeing that IRC 7701(c) applied to IRC 7701(a). As pointed out above, his response was illogical since he cannot (or refuses to) understand the common sense definition of what "includes" means. At that point, I told him that not only his answer was meaningless, but conversing with him was meaningless as well. And that means I would be blocking him from PMing me in the future.

[FRANKENSTEIN]

OK, throwing it right back at you since you appear to be interested in definitions. Your answer to this question determines whether or not I debate you, ignore you, or just plain mock you. Using Dietrich Bonhoeffer's theory of stupidity which category do you feel you belong to: stupid, ignorant, or simply whimsical?
http://southsidemessenger.com/bonhoeffe ... ire-quote/
... eagerly awaiting your answer.....

Concerning the subject matter at hand , the only category you offer up that I would feel comfortable
in saying I feel I could belong to would be "simply whimsical" .
Is whimsical a personality trait?
If you have a Whimsical style personality: You're imaginative, playful, and idealistic. for all the beautiful things life has to offer! You have a childlike soul and a pure heart of gold.

[FRANKENSTEIN]

I got PMs from him back in October after I had told him on a thread that a question he had asked was meaningless due to him agreeing that IRC 7701(c) applied to IRC 7701(a). As pointed out above, his response was illogical since he cannot (or refuses to) understand the common sense definition of what "includes" means. At that point, I told him that not only his answer was meaningless, but conversing with him was meaningless as well. And that means I would be blocking him from PMing me in the future.

You guys are funny ! I know exactly what the common sense definition of "includes" means .
Don't worry though . I will soon post a rock solid , explanation that anyone with an elementary understanding
of English Grammar will grasp . You guys did pay attention in English Grammar didn't you !!??
I'll start off for now with a couple Facts I will Stipulate to , that I'm Positive you will all AGREE with .
1. The usual/normal Definition of "trade or business" I accept . What we all normally would say is a trade or business.
Whatever the specific definition may be , I accept .
2. I agree IRC 7701(c) applies to IRC 7701(a) .
Soon , I will post my Reasoned Logical explanation , and it will leave you ALL utterly Dumbfounded & any weapons of
words you may have in your arsenals will become utterly useless in your defenses !!
You will have no choice but to discard them & throw them into the useless pile of rubbish .
And then you must walk away , holding your heads down in a walk of shame .

[Dr. Caligari]

Soon , I will post my Reasoned Logical explanation , and it will leave you ALL utterly Dumbfounded & any weapons of
words you may have in your arsenals will become utterly useless in your defenses !!
You will have no choice but to discard them & throw them into the useless pile of rubbish .
And then you must walk away , holding your heads down in a walk of shame .

I can hardly wait!

[AnOwlCalledSage]

You guys are funny ! I know exactly what the common sense definition of "includes" means .

No. You really don't

And that's the hill where all your nonsense dies on.

[wserra]

You will have no choice but to discard them & throw them into the useless pile of rubbish . And then you must walk away , holding your heads down in a walk of shame .

[eric]

Soon , I will post my Reasoned Logical explanation , and it will leave you ALL utterly Dumbfounded & any weapons of
words you may have in your arsenals will become utterly useless in your defenses !!
You will have no choice but to discard them & throw them into the useless pile of rubbish .
And then you must walk away , holding your heads down in a walk of shame .

It appears that Frank never bothered to read Bonhoeffer's letter, or if he did, he failed to grasp what it meant. Here's a summary for Frank - some people are so off base, especially when their thoughts are reinforced by a group, that they require something profound to convince them of the error of their ways. In farmer speak, it's called how do you talk to a bull? The answer is with a 2 X 4 across the head. Frank is taking pleasure in the fact that members of quatloos are reacting to his posts, and can show off to his small circle of friends his debating skills. In reality he is just the same as the previously mentioned bull - he's snorted, pawed the ground, but done nothing other than sh*t in the barn. Unless and until he gets to the point, I'm ignoring him.

[Pottapaug1938]

I have better things to do than try to debate Frankie -- like watching my fingernails grow. Like all of our (ahahaha) beloved trolls, he comes here, hoping to engage us in nonsensical dialogue; and he intends, as soon as we tire of him, to return to his World of Delusion, bragging about how he gave us all WHAT FOR! and how we could not answer his (unanswerable) questions.

I think that there is a better chance of the sun rising in the west and setting in the east than of him engaging in serious debate with us. Until then, his posts deserve no answer.