Re: indy708
I know what you mean about the triumvirate. They are always accusing everyone of not addressing thier questions.
Yeah, you might actually run the risk of getting that reaction when you post unwarranted insults, and then don't address their questions about those insults. Go figure.
Clever tactic seeing as how thier post will consist of 14 to 20 question marks.
How interesting that you, someone for whom a primary tactic is "if you can't beat'em on the arguments, wear'em down with childish barbs", would attempt to cover for your own incompetence by using the word "tactic" to refer to relevant, serious questions that were simply too tough for you, especially since I've already pointed out that the many questions in my posts have been in direct response to the many questionable statements in your own. In fact, your attempt to focus on something like the number of questions is a bit of a "tactic" itself, isn't it? Just another way of deflecting attention from your own failures, kind of like when you criticized my posts for their length a while back, right?
Of course, you started dodging my questions well before there were nearly as many as the "14 to 20" you claim, leading to some of those questions being repeated in later posts, along with new ones, but I can understand why you wouldn't want to mention that little detail. There would have been less repetition if you had been able to seriously address even half of them in the beginning, without resorting to that third grade level you seem to have to rely on. How sad that you can't seem to hold up your own end of a discussion without it. For example ...
I'm just going to ignore anything that looks like an anal nit.
Based on your posts, I'd say that must be what just about anything that exposes the weaknesses in your arguments looks like to you. It figures that you would ignore such things, though. Such selectiveness kind of makes for an easier debate, huh?
It's not like I'm going to wave a magic wand and turn them into rational human beings.
Yeah, that "anal nit" stuff really lends itself to rational discussion, and just the sort of thing "rational human beings" generally use as a strong argument, right? You're getting funnier all the time.
Letting them wallow in thier own self indulgence ultimately will become a self fulfilling phrophecy.
You seem to have quite a bit of a "self indulgence" thing going yourself. I've seen a few people whose ability to debate honestly was as awful as yours, but I'm not sure any of them have have seemed quite so proud of it.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
