don't click here

ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF


    Print

Author Topic: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF  (Read 103677 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline douglas

  • TSC Grand Vizier
  • If I had a (ban)hammer
  • TSC Profile
  • win7 chrome
  • Posts: 856
    • View Profile
    • douglasgresham.co.uk
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #90 on: May 16, 2008, 04:11:18 am »
I raised the point that neither the defence nor the prosecution should be in charge of the judge, and that suddenly rendered you incapable of producing any evidence for the case?  Fail.

Quote from: Rick_242
in no way shows any corruption. Allow me to explain. The trial at that time was whether or not Johan Gasmask could be capable of doing any work. The Prosecution at the time was supposed to prove Mr. Gasmask guilty of not being able to do any work. However, the trial shifted from proving Mr. Gasmask guilty to this leaving the Prosecution unable to get his guilty verdict. The shift was due to the post mentioned above. If the Prosecution really was using the judge for his own corrupted ends then...

He would not have made that post!
Alternative hypothesis: after being called out, the prosecution's main objective was no longer to ensure a guilty verdict, but to defend their previous actions in the trial, particularly given it was pretty obvious that the defence was well ahead in the actual trial.
This topic has now been officially won by me.  Never mind, you might do better next time!
www.douglasgresham.co.uk - it's in the intarwebs, it must be true!

Offline Rick_242

  • Always getting stuck inside walls.
  • TSC Profile
  • win7 firefox
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #91 on: May 16, 2008, 07:48:23 pm »
Ooooh, like the file was the only piece of evidence in the trial. There was a lot more pieces of evidence the prosecution had up his sleeve but did not have the chance to show it due to that post (see: Top Tens).

Quote from: Douglas
I raised the point that neither the defence nor the prosecution should be in charge of the judge, and that suddenly rendered you incapable of producing any evidence for the case?  Fail.

The trial in this case is whether or not the defence and prosecution are corrupt. Not that they shouldn't have been in control of the judge. If you examine the posts made with the judge made by the defence and prosecution there is hardly any corruption in it.

Looks like you are the one who really fails.
<Sondow> also what
<Sondow> since when was S&K an expansion pack to s3
<Sondow> wiki LIES

Offline douglas

  • TSC Grand Vizier
  • If I had a (ban)hammer
  • TSC Profile
  • win7 chrome
  • Posts: 856
    • View Profile
    • douglasgresham.co.uk
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #92 on: May 17, 2008, 06:09:48 am »
Ooooh, like the file was the only piece of evidence in the trial. There was a lot more pieces of evidence the prosecution had up his sleeve but did not have the chance to show it due to that post (see: Top Tens).
The case wasn't that Mr Gasmask always did work, just that he was capable of it.  You'd failed to rebut that point.

Quote from: Rick_242
Quote from: Douglas
I raised the point that neither the defence nor the prosecution should be in charge of the judge, and that suddenly rendered you incapable of producing any evidence for the case?  Fail.

The trial in this case is whether or not the defence and prosecution are corrupt. Not that they shouldn't have been in control of the judge. If you examine the posts made with the judge made by the defence and prosecution there is hardly any corruption in it.

Looks like you are the one who really fails.
Note the underline; "hardly any" != none.

Your Honour, this is an admission that corruption was present, and as I have said it is for you to decide the magnitude thereof and what the repercussions should be.  I have nothing more to add.
This topic has now been officially won by me.  Never mind, you might do better next time!
www.douglasgresham.co.uk - it's in the intarwebs, it must be true!

Offline Rick_242

  • Always getting stuck inside walls.
  • TSC Profile
  • win7 firefox
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #93 on: May 17, 2008, 04:14:58 pm »
Ooooh, like the file was the only piece of evidence in the trial. There was a lot more pieces of evidence the prosecution had up his sleeve but did not have the chance to show it due to that post (see: Top Tens).
The case wasn't that Mr Gasmask always did work, just that he was capable of it.  You'd failed to rebut that point.

Quote from: Rick_242
Quote from: Douglas
I raised the point that neither the defence nor the prosecution should be in charge of the judge, and that suddenly rendered you incapable of producing any evidence for the case?  Fail.

The trial in this case is whether or not the defence and prosecution are corrupt. Not that they shouldn't have been in control of the judge. If you examine the posts made with the judge made by the defence and prosecution there is hardly any corruption in it.

Looks like you are the one who really fails.
Note the underline; "hardly any" != none.

Your Honour, this is an admission that corruption was present, and as I have said it is for you to decide the magnitude thereof and what the repercussions should be.  I have nothing more to add.

Quote
The case is that RPG is being accused of not wanting to work and not if he did not need to fill out the Results/Comments section! So far, all my evidence show that he, RPG, does not want to work while you are trying to prove the wrong thing!

No. The case was that he did not want to do any work. If you're going to say something along the lines of "The topic title says capable which means the case was whether or not he could do work," the topic title can work both ways, its just a matter of diction. "Lol you don't want to do work" "BS, I can do some work." | "Lol you can't do any work" "BS, I want to do some work." The more likely option would, of course, be wanting to do work.

Now you're just nitpicking at word choice. Say there was some, if any, corruption present, surely there must be some evidence that has such small traces of corruption and if so I request that you present such evidence for examination.
<Sondow> also what
<Sondow> since when was S&K an expansion pack to s3
<Sondow> wiki LIES

Offline Bilan

  • Broseidon
  • TSC: RPGnutter
  • win10 chrome
  • Posts: 3883
  • ZURA ZURA CHUUPA CHUUPA CHUU CHUU
    • View Profile
    • I'm suffering help me Garian
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #94 on: May 17, 2008, 04:28:45 pm »




Mr Justice I am afraid the witness is correct, the prior trial was to conclude if RPG was capable or doing work, willingness to work was never part of the equation. Though it would be quite clear that in order to produce a works of the magnitude provided as evidence, he would also need be willing in order to actually produce such an extensive document.
Did you not think I had a mind?

Offline Rick_242

  • Always getting stuck inside walls.
  • TSC Profile
  • win7 firefox
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #95 on: May 17, 2008, 05:41:22 pm »
The Prosecution stated before this trial that the previous trial was indeed on whether or not RPG was willing to do work. No objections were raised. The Prosecution even stated it numerous times and no objections were raised (one post might be an objection to the claim but its hard to say for sure).
<Sondow> also what
<Sondow> since when was S&K an expansion pack to s3
<Sondow> wiki LIES

Offline Aitamen

  • TSC Profile
  • win7 firefox
  • Posts: 1130
  • I am a follower of the immortal Dark Falz!
    • View Profile
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #96 on: October 17, 2008, 11:28:11 pm »
>_>
Year 33 — The Malkavians claim that their greatest practical joke happened during this year, when they perform a bit of graverobbing  in Jerusalem.
-- Vampire: The Masquerade

Offline Selphos

  • The Eternally Young Scarlet Moon
  • Broseidon
  • TSC: Sondow
  • win10 firefox
  • Posts: 980
  • TSC's local Touhou nut
    • View Profile
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #97 on: October 18, 2008, 12:19:54 am »
Er aita what was the purpose of reviving this topic
The moon is so red. Looks like it's going to be a fun night.

Offline F-Man

Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #98 on: October 18, 2008, 01:49:51 am »
To think my memories had this being the proof that P.P.A. is a furry. Well, one of them.

Offline P.P.A.

Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #99 on: October 18, 2008, 05:21:13 am »
I'm not a furry. But you're right, that case was never solved. We should perhaps continue it if someone can find the thread.
THESE IMAGES CONFISCATED FOR EVIDENCE

My YouTube profile. Lots of Sonic speedruns~

Offline Groudon

  • 1 hour, 39 minutes, 52 seconds
  • Broseidon
  • TSC: Groudon199
  • win10 firefox
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
    • My YouTube channel
Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« Reply #100 on: October 18, 2008, 07:11:12 am »
I'm not a furry. But you're right, that case was never solved. We should perhaps continue it if someone can find the thread.



http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3413.0


i don't feel like returning to the judge's position

    Print
 

Hits: 55 | Hits This Month: 1 | DB Calls: 8 | Mem Usage: 1.16 MB | Time: 0.09s | Printable

The Sonic Center v3.9
Copyright 2003-2011 by The Sonic Center Team.