Destroying your C/P BS to try to COVER UP YOUR DUCK MOVEs!!!!
1) The TRUTH - That was YOU SQUIRMING AWAY from the TOPIC of the THREAD!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
2) I pointed out to where was your initial statement and guess what followed? OUR AGREEMENT!!!!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
a) I was actually asking DUCK BOY if he is aware that he agreed that EPO technical document was ALL in SCOPE. Now go as DUCK BOY if he was in AGREEMENT that it was ALL in SCOPE?
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
NOTE: During the 85+ pages, Travestyny was CRYING that the EPO technical document was in SCOPE BUT the TRUTH is that during the debate, he was saying the OPPOSITE!!!!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
b) You pointing to a post that you said "UNLESS YOUR MISTAKEN" proves 2 things.
- That was NOT the post where we BOTH agreed, was it?
- secondly, YOU WERE MISTAKEN!!!!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
c) YES, my statement is clear. it said that it "INCLUDES ...." BUT you definitely do not UNDERSTAND that statement of mine anyways, so WTF are you trying to say? I asked you this before DEFLECTOR!!!
and I also said other things DUCK BOY. Care to share all my statements?
You know, the "NOTE", the T/E RATIO example and so on!!!!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
3) If you go back, YOU were the one who saw my initial posts and realized that you were screwed so you wanted to limit the SCOPE. Right? and said so.
BUT if it helped your cause, you wanted it to become "IN SCOPE" else it was "OUT OF SCOPE"
EXAMPLE:
You were fine with a 2003 case/documents being IN SCOPE.
You were fine with a 2009 case/documents being IN SCOPE.
You were fine with a 2010 case/documents being IN SCOPE.
So I was stating that it is OUT OF SCOPE (as per your own statements) but now you want it IN SCOPE.
If you care to share all of those posts, you will see that once I SHOOT DOWN your POSTs,
You said to the same case that you brought up as IN SCOPE (since you brought it up):
That 2009 case/document IS OUT OF SCOPE!!!!
So yes, BY YOUR ACTIONs, those should not be OUT OF SCOPE. I remember even stating this in my posts.
- BUT as I said, you had no problem with using 2003 case and ACCEPTING votes based on that
- BUT you actually tried to remove from scope the document that you said was IN SCOPE.
4) VAGUE - Be honest - LIAR
a) That was YOU trying to SQUIRM from the TOPIC that I was CHALLENGING YOU on!!!!
b) There is NOTHING VAGUE with my CHALLENGE. They were FREAKING based on your post in which you said, YOU COULDN'T STATE IT MORE CLEARLY!!!!
c) You were ready to ACCEPT the topic but then placed roadblocks ONLY for that CHALLENGE! Ooops!
5)
a) This is just a roadblock. I provided to you a fair solution.
b) I was going to give my points to a 3rd party. You win, you get as many points you want.
I win, I wanted no points from the LIAR and CHEATER, travestyny. More that fair deal
c) You were not concerned about this if it was any other challenge DUCK BOY!!!!
d) Most importantly, there was a reason why you didn't get those points. YOU LIED and CHEATED.
This DUCK of YOURs PROVEs that I was RIGHT and YOU WERE WRONG.
e) YOU OWE the Judges an APOLOGY but that is on YOU. Do whatever you want to do!
f) When you posted our "Private Message" I knew that I was not dealing with a cool dude. Today, you are not just called RAT BOY, you now became DUCK BOY!!!!
.
1) The TRUTH - That was YOU SQUIRMING AWAY from the TOPIC of the THREAD!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
2) I pointed out to where was your initial statement and guess what followed? OUR AGREEMENT!!!!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
a) I was actually asking DUCK BOY if he is aware that he agreed that EPO technical document was ALL in SCOPE. Now go as DUCK BOY if he was in AGREEMENT that it was ALL in SCOPE?
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
NOTE: During the 85+ pages, Travestyny was CRYING that the EPO technical document was in SCOPE BUT the TRUTH is that during the debate, he was saying the OPPOSITE!!!!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
b) You pointing to a post that you said "UNLESS YOUR MISTAKEN" proves 2 things.
- That was NOT the post where we BOTH agreed, was it?
- secondly, YOU WERE MISTAKEN!!!!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
c) YES, my statement is clear. it said that it "INCLUDES ...." BUT you definitely do not UNDERSTAND that statement of mine anyways, so WTF are you trying to say? I asked you this before DEFLECTOR!!!
and I also said other things DUCK BOY. Care to share all my statements?
You know, the "NOTE", the T/E RATIO example and so on!!!!
KABADABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
3) If you go back, YOU were the one who saw my initial posts and realized that you were screwed so you wanted to limit the SCOPE. Right? and said so.
BUT if it helped your cause, you wanted it to become "IN SCOPE" else it was "OUT OF SCOPE"
EXAMPLE:
You were fine with a 2003 case/documents being IN SCOPE.
You were fine with a 2009 case/documents being IN SCOPE.
You were fine with a 2010 case/documents being IN SCOPE.
So I was stating that it is OUT OF SCOPE (as per your own statements) but now you want it IN SCOPE.
If you care to share all of those posts, you will see that once I SHOOT DOWN your POSTs,
You said to the same case that you brought up as IN SCOPE (since you brought it up):
That 2009 case/document IS OUT OF SCOPE!!!!
So yes, BY YOUR ACTIONs, those should not be OUT OF SCOPE. I remember even stating this in my posts.
- BUT as I said, you had no problem with using 2003 case and ACCEPTING votes based on that
- BUT you actually tried to remove from scope the document that you said was IN SCOPE.
4) VAGUE - Be honest - LIAR
a) That was YOU trying to SQUIRM from the TOPIC that I was CHALLENGING YOU on!!!!
b) There is NOTHING VAGUE with my CHALLENGE. They were FREAKING based on your post in which you said, YOU COULDN'T STATE IT MORE CLEARLY!!!!
c) You were ready to ACCEPT the topic but then placed roadblocks ONLY for that CHALLENGE! Ooops!
5)
a) This is just a roadblock. I provided to you a fair solution.
b) I was going to give my points to a 3rd party. You win, you get as many points you want.
I win, I wanted no points from the LIAR and CHEATER, travestyny. More that fair deal
c) You were not concerned about this if it was any other challenge DUCK BOY!!!!
d) Most importantly, there was a reason why you didn't get those points. YOU LIED and CHEATED.
This DUCK of YOURs PROVEs that I was RIGHT and YOU WERE WRONG.
e) YOU OWE the Judges an APOLOGY but that is on YOU. Do whatever you want to do!
f) When you posted our "Private Message" I knew that I was not dealing with a cool dude. Today, you are not just called RAT BOY, you now became DUCK BOY!!!!
.
YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE MY LITTLE BlTCH WHO TOOK A 4-0 ASSWHOOPIN AND CRIED ABOUT IT FOR OVER A YEAR.....BUT WOULDN'T STEP UP TO A REMATCH. LMAOOOOOOOO. 
Comment