JoshBot3000 wrote: Nope. I wrote the OP. Basically it says that honest people tend have evidence of their honesty
fidsah wrote: JoshBot3000 wrote: Nope. I wrote the OP. Basically it says that honest people tend have evidence of their honesty Exactly. The honest people must prove their honesty. Must provide evidence they're being honest. Edit: Once again, I'll refer you to the West Memphis Three.
JoshBot3000 wrote: Generally the dishonest tend not to have valid alibis/stories because they were in fact dishonest. That's the point.
JoshBot3000 wrote: fidsah wrote: JoshBot3000 wrote: Nope. I wrote the OP. Basically it says that honest people tend have evidence of their honesty Exactly. The honest people must prove their honesty. Must provide evidence they're being honest. Edit: Once again, I'll refer you to the West Memphis Three. Bro again... Please read this clearly this time... Honest people TEND to have evidence of their honesty. They are not guaranteed to have it. People may disregard it. but GENERALLY SPEAKING honest people can prove their honesty. I mentioned that using fringe examples is not the best form of argument because using a small percentage of data to speak against a GENERALIZED claim is asinine. Generalized arguments speak to the claims of the vast majority not for every single case
gamar wrote: Ah, but if you accuse me of slander without being able to prove I cant prove what I'm saying is true , isn't it YOU who is guilty of slander? WHAT THEN?!
mikeydollar7 wrote: While we're on the psychology / sociology lesson, people who accuse others of something (eg cheating) are the ones more likely to be doing it themselves. If you don't believe the theory I gather that Jeremy Kyle has proof
fidsah wrote: JoshBot3000 wrote: fidsah wrote: JoshBot3000 wrote: Nope. I wrote the OP. Basically it says that honest people tend have evidence of their honesty Exactly. The honest people must prove their honesty. Must provide evidence they're being honest. Edit: Once again, I'll refer you to the West Memphis Three. Bro again... Please read this clearly this time... Honest people TEND to have evidence of their honesty. They are not guaranteed to have it. People may disregard it. but GENERALLY SPEAKING honest people can prove their honesty. I mentioned that using fringe examples is not the best form of argument because using a small percentage of data to speak against a GENERALIZED claim is asinine. Generalized arguments speak to the claims of the vast majority not for every single case No, you're speaking of generalizations that are not true, but at the same time support my argument. The idea that honest people will have evidence of their honesty is entirely untrue, because in most cases, they will never think that they need to keep it. I'm sorry if you don't understand the ramifications of your argument. There are plenty of examples where honest people get screwed over trying to prove their honesty, because they're falling into the same logic trap as what you're presenting. I get that you're just trying to build a case based on the tweet you made that you've since hidden for whatever reason. If honest people should have the evidence, why did you hide the tweet? What are you now trying to hide? What is your involvement in this that made you hide what you once had open? Where did your transparency go? Now, I'm going to have to ask you for evidence that you're not involved with the X-Men on this. You've hidden far too many things lately about your involvement for me to feel that your sudden push for "open and transparent" should not be taken into consideration with the fact that your'e now hiding things. Do you see how this works, now?
gamar wrote: As a civil libertarion let me just say that nobody should ever go to court because ACCUSING someone of wrongdoing without that wrongdoing being already proven in court is a violation of civil liborties Catch-22'd motherkitties
LoreNYC wrote: gamar wrote: As a civil libertarion let me just say that nobody should ever go to court because ACCUSING someone of wrongdoing without that wrongdoing being already proven in court is a violation of civil liborties Catch-22'd motherkitties Good thing this isn't court or anything regarding civil liberties then
Bugpop wrote:
WorldRunner wrote: What proof am I or someone else supposed to provide? Bank statements? That's all I or any high scorer can provide because the method is rather clear. I play no differently now than I did when I was putting up the same scores under the name of 5D. Nobody was suspicious of me then. Naz extended an invitation to join you guys for one PvP to help show you how to get high scores for the team correct? I know you guys thought he was just being a jerk but he did extend the invitation and you declined. How much more transparency are you looking for? The rest isn't addressed to you Josh but I find it fascinating how many people question my or someone else's motives for going for a high score. What's YOUR motivation for playing a game you so clearly hate and a game that you are convinced people are cheating at? What's anyone's motivation for anything? Every video game I've ever played that had leaderboards has the same issue. Some people want to compete for the top. Those who don't or can't can either a) do what it takes to get to the top b) play anyway and not worry about it or c) Quit. Continuing to play while allowing your hatred to grow for the game and the people who play it seems like a rather ridiculous venture.
KevinMark wrote: Is this another thread about X-Men? You guys need a life.
LoreNYC wrote: Hmviewtopic.php?t=10965#p179440 Hm and if you must know, we were very suspicious until you revealed that you spend a fortune. But that's your hobby so be it