12/04/2012 8:33pm, #2241
And no, as has already been pointed out, a) you're not training "no jiu-jitsu at all" (that doesn't mean anything) and b) your field doesn't actually say that in English.
Are you deceiving random people that you are training in something distinct from Tai Chi Chuan by using the less publicly known of the two romanizations? LOLOL
And you just KNOW this. You're paranoid beyond words dude.
Know that people can Google up threads other than this one and see your style field? Yes I do know that. Everyone does.
Know that people can be misled? Yes I do know that. Everyone does.
Know that you chose these fields to produce a bit of frisson? Yes. Remember this:
Well, it's two things: it's a parody of "Nage No Kata" which is on of ... way of saying I suck (No Katanas at NAGA in the immediate future). Really I haven't been training and I don't have anything besides a pun in my style field.
The joy of a pun is based on frisson—the thrill created by understanding/misunderstanding. The pun only works if misunderstanding is cultivated along with understanding.
Finally, you've already acknowledged you don't believe that your field represents your training (you were doing it to annoy me, and plus you started training last week)—thus, hypocrite.
Every person with half a brain reading this thread knows that interpretation is about as likely as you showing up at the next Mega
What is it you like to say? Oh yeah, quote or STFU.
It better be.
And I filled it out correctly in a recognized Human language spoken by hundreds of millions of people.
Really? "Our?" Who the **** do you think you are?
Specify who was attacked for not being current, and provide a quote or STFU
YES, because this is the serious kind of fucking up the style field, and not the dance where you put in something you're not currently training.
So, CPF is doing a "dance" with his style field despite having a fair amount of useful experience in gongfu that he shares on the CMA board on this site, while your style field shenanigans are magically cool because a mod hadn't told you to change it yet. You then hustled to get clearance and called me a ******.
PS: nothing is more hilarious than you telling people to STFU. Or what? You'll fall to your knees in front of them and tap out?
PPS: yes yes, I know, you'll whine that saying that someone else is dancing is not an attack, and indeed it is a mild one—we know you're not capable of anything more than that—but the fact is that CPF has a good reason for his field and uses it to help this site, and you have your shitty field only because you have a lot of ego-needs not being met elsewhere in your life. Oh boy, a thread about you! On the Internet! Yeah!
It must be awesome being so fucking smart.
12/04/2012 8:44pm, #2242
Specifically that it was set up with the idea of eliminating censorship that was applied specifically to me someplace else. ICY, PeeDee, JKD and Phrost stood up for me once, and they have my loyalty. As does this place.
"Positioned" when exactly? He didn't say he started it post-TD until waay after I called his vid "lousy"
I never said a fucking thing about "600 hours" regarding Zendokan at all. You're mistaken. Quote me or shut the **** up. You can keep putting words in my mouth all night, but it won't stick.
Dude, I commented that his skills looked "pretty terrible" for someone training 600 hours a year
1) What does my fight have to do with Rene's training?
2) I made an apology in public to Zendo
3) Kin chose to walk out to the center of the ring and call me a "Douche" after the fight was over
I walked out to the exact same spot and asked him WTF he was going on about.
He chose to walk out to center stage and be insulting when neither me, nor anyone from my corner was saying a word to him.
3) I just skimmed ChuckWepner's reply, and I very well might have an apology for him as well. We'll see.
Last edited by Rivington; 12/04/2012 8:47pm at .
12/04/2012 8:55pm, #2243
Matt, I'm not piling on, but I agree your style field saying NAGA NO KATANA or nao ha jiu jitsu is not in keeping with what you purport to be your stance in this site. If you aren't training, say you're not training by putting "not training at the moment". By putting nao ha jiu jitsu you are saying you are training in something to noobs who may not know better, who may think it is some top secret malarkey, that you are the recipient of teh deadly. I remember when I came on here and say a variety of martial arts in style fields that I had never heard of, many with Asian sounding names. WTF is Xingyi? I assume it is a Chinese Kung Fu, because it has a Xing and a yi in it, which possibly makes me racist but more likely just ignorant. So your nao ha jiu jitsu, despite being hilarious to you because you know that it means no jiu jitsu, well ****, I don't know Portuguese, you could be learning a Brazilian family style based from Vale Tudo that took Jiu Jitsu in the name because of the marketing potential.
Many of us get it, lol, haha, yeah, there is no katanas at NAGA, good one, what a great pun, and nao ha jiu jitsu (with the accents), man, that's awesome that you know Portuguese, wish I had that kind of wordplay ability. But seriously, the way you were talking about the sanctity of the style field, well, you're being disingenuous.GET A RED BELT OR DIE TRYIN'.
12/04/2012 9:06pm, #2244
12/04/2012 9:22pm, #2245
12/04/2012 9:25pm, #2246
12/04/2012 9:58pm, #2247
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Lauren Southern Poverty Law Center
- Submission Grappling
To the latter: do you find it hypocritical if I yell "EVERYBODY STOP TALKING", or if I fight a "war to end all wars", or, upon hearing a certain Cartesian argument happen to suppose for, say, 24 hours that I do not Exist? Whatever the final result of our conversation about the technical definition of self-refutation is, all of the above share the same property as my decision to post about my opinion that I should not post on the site while I am not training. Are the examples above really what you mean by "hypocrisy", and are they really in a separate category from what I have said and done that prompts you to name me as such? If so, please explain.
More to the point, I said that I should not post actively. Me. Actively. Granted, my activity on this thread is in violation of "NOT ACTIVELY", but you contend that I have attempted to apply this to others, yet refuse to provide evidence that I ever said such a thing, or prove that I ever contended that I had knowledge that any other person was not training. It is a simple matter to go back and find the offending material, is it not?
To the former: quoting from Self-refutation--a formal analysis, J. L. Mackie' Philosophical Quarterly 14 (56):193-203 (1964)
We have pragmatic self-refutation when the way in which something is presented conflicts with what is presented. For example, if I say I am not saying anything, what I say is false; it is falsified by the very way in which I put it forward. Similarly, if I write that I am not writing, what I write must be false.
If I had posted "Non-trainers like me do not post" instead of "Non-trainers like me should not post" then we would not be having this discussion, and I would have been correct in applying the term "self-refuting" to my prior posting.
Do you think anyone here was tuned in enough to the fine point of this distinction to be affected in any way by my misapplying "self-refuting" in a way that is undetectable by anyone who is not a professional philosopher? Because you have called me a hypocrite and accused me of acting unfairly to others on the basis of this very fine epistemic point.
If I write "Someone posts about all posters that do not post about themselves" on this forum (I just did), will you say merely that paradox is in play, but malign me if I attempt to express a belief that no one should post so?
What you have done is extremely hairy and unfair, and it's resting on your appeal to your own credentials and other posters lack of interest in following technical points in philosophy. I doubt more than one or two people following this care to understand the distinction you have made, and I am sure that they are not among the posters "agreeing" with you on this.
Fortunately there are people outside your profession who are quite capable and interested enough to follow what you are saying, and to see the problem with how you tried to use it.
Last edited by Matt Phillips; 12/04/2012 10:11pm at .Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie
KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao
In De Janerio, in blackest night,
Luta Livre flees the fight,
Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!
12/04/2012 10:01pm, #2248
- Join Date
- Nov 2012
- Chicago / Michigan
12/04/2012 10:07pm, #2249
**** semantics. Shut up and train.GET A RED BELT OR DIE TRYIN'.
12/04/2012 10:09pm, #2250