But you did all the same. What’s that about? [/quote]
When two posters - who strangely seem to be hyper-attuned to every one else’s faults but blind to their own -team up to make patronizing jibes directed at me, I have every right to respond … That’s what it’s “about”.
Glad you brought up hypothetical questions, but you forgot to include that whopper above where you claim B6 has been banned, when your own sources say no such thing. What they do say is that pyridoxamine has been withdrawn as a supplement based on it’s status as “an investigational new drug”. I can quote your own sources back at you if you want.
You substituted “banned” for “withdrawn”, a subtle but significant semantic switch, to make your argument stick.
In response to that same hypothetical question, I asked you to provide me with an answer, and you didn’t, because they haven’t banned it.
So yes, I know exactly what you were trying to do there (which is why I gave you a rhetorical answer that sent the question with no answer right back at you), and despite what you think you know about me, I do read, comprehend and absorb posted material before forming an opinion. We done?
[/quote]
Hey guys,
This is a thread on a weight training website designed to market Biotest products. Who gives a fuck about typos and html coding? Just follow the message. If your best debate is that your message had not been seperated correctly in a quote, you aer probably done debating. Just sayyyingg.
[quote]roybot wrote:
When two posters - who strangely seem to be hyper-attuned to every one else’s faults but blind to their own -team up to make patronizing jibes directed at me, I have every right to respond … That’s what it’s “about”.[/quote]
I found it highly impotent indeed to declare that you had no need to justify or respond immediately after you did so.
[quote]roybot wrote:
Glad you brought up hypothetical questions, but you forgot to include that whopper above where you claim B6 has been banned, when your own sources say no such thing. What they do say is that pyridoxamine has been withdrawn as a supplement based on it’s status as “an investigational new drug”. I can quote your own sources back at you if you want.
You substituted “banned” for “withdrawn”, a subtle but significant semantic switch, to make your argument stick.
In response to that same hypothetical question, I asked you to provide me with an answer, and you didn’t, because they haven’t banned it.
So yes, I know exactly what you were trying to do there (which is why I gave you a rhetorical answer that sent the question with no answer right back at you), and despite what you think you know about me, I do read, comprehend and absorb posted material before forming an opinion. We done?[/quote]
I stated that a “form” of B6 was being banned. In addition to another form of B6 being attempted to be banned. Whether banned or withdrawn, the difference becomes separated by the criminal penalties of possessing or distributing a banned or scheduled substance versus one that is withdrawn. The end result of either being a drastic increase in the difficulty of acquisition for the consumer. So while the two words are not synonymous, in the context of the argument they do function so. Regardless, implicating that I covertly switched once word for another with devious intentions to make my argument sound more plausible is asinine, just as using the mechanics of my semantics as a vehicle to disassemble the argument in its entirety. This gives the impression that you gave more thought to the structure and “verbage” than you did the argument itself and its details. I also highly doubt that with the speed of your replies you were able to read and digest every piece of information I posted. Feel free to continue to ask as such though, but this will be my last response to such postings in this thread, this sort of back and forth is not productive to further discussion on the topic.
This is a thread on a weight training website designed to market Biotest products. Who gives a fuck about typos and html coding? Just follow the message. If your best debate is that your message had not been seperated correctly in a quote, you aer probably done debating. Just sayyyingg.
[/quote]
When the html coding of a quoted post makes the source content difficult to determine it increases the difficulty of the average reader, who barely reads the damn posts anyway, to follow. “roybot” cleaned up the post in question and I have no issue with that and appreciate the doing so, it makes the flow of information that much cleaner. I did find it completely pointless that he quoted you simply to correct your spelling, and so I did similar as a form of satire directed at his own post.