@thejman250 said:
LMAO, then why don't you post your argument instead of telling me I'm illiterate? You should at least be smart enough to know how to copy and paste. Since my interpretation/opinion of what diversity simply for the sake of diversity means is not right, and according to you it is so simple, you should not have any issue elaborating.
- You mean that DC is having Diversity simply for the sake of diversity? This was posted ages ago, you're just illiterate.
- You're "interpretation" of it is that it's ignorance(according to your drivel) and that's simply your opinion that i don't care for.
Since you can't attack my points you attack me directly. How cute. Don't have a cow man, it is just the internet.
- What points? You mean your drivel that you fabricated into my agument , or the points you brought up that couldn't adequately defeat the points that you fabriccated? Ok kid.
No you brought up points about these characters being white since they were created which added nothing to the discussion. But please explain how them being white since their creation makes them replacing other white character okay, while Luc replacing David isn't, or how it somehow ties to your diversity for the sake of Diversity argument. Dazzle me with your brilliance.
- I brought up points in response to your fabricating drivel into my argument. Ok.
- You know what, it wouldn't tie to my "diversity simply for the sake of diversity" because that's my argument and this drivel was something that you brought into the conversation. Common sense.
Actually you did when you defended Dick, Azriel, Wally replacing white characters using their prior integration to the universe and when you said "Then i think you need better examples for your point than Batman being replaced by Batman jr. who has been there for over 50 years or so. Not some random black guy being introduced in africa, and then being replaced by a guy who wasn't even in continuity at all as far as i know."
- i mentioned them after you initially brought them into the conversation? Surprise, surprise imbecile.
So basically the only thing worth addressing in the response is "To argue the points that you fabricated into my argument?" Are you admitting then that you have offered no points in this debate? Since all the points I seem arguing against were fabricated by me? LMAO. O I must be illerate, and missing all those points you didn't feel you need to explain to the likes of me? RIGHT? OMG! Thanks for that.
- "The only thing worth addressing" is an opinion, and yours is quite trivial to me.
- My argument was that DC is having diversity simply for the sake of diversity which you clearly don't comprehend.
- Yes, the majority of this idiotic "conversation" consisted of your drivel and my responses to it. Surprise, surprise.
Hmm complete lack of any argument or explanation....Just throw insults...LMAO
- Diversity simply for the sake of diversity, doesn't need an explanation, it's common knowledge, and common sense will tell you what it is.
- If you have the brain capacity of a fish, that's not my problem.
in this debate
- Don't even flatter yourself by attempting to call this idiotic conversation a debate you imbecile.
- As if an incompetent illiterate imbecile like yourself would be worthy of having a debate with me.
But I though you were not using abruptness as points in your argument? I thought I was fabricating this. I also thought I made it clear that the level of integration a character has, has nothing to do with race, so you're attempt to keep using it to justify your hate for Luc replacing David or Or having Blacks just for diversity is pathetic. But keep using this pointer that I fabricated.
- Actually, abruptness has nothing to do with "Diversity simply for the sake of diversity"' as that can be done in a number of ways.
- My "hate for 'Luc' (you realize his name is Luke right?) replacing David"? Typical ignorance and assumptions.
- The level of integration was brought up as a response to your drivel. Don't even attempt to associate it with my argument.
- Oh , you think it's pathetic? If only i actually valued your opinion more than that of an insect's.
So after several responses of this temper tantrum we get to 1 point worth addressing, underlined for your convenience. You said "The level of integration was brought up as a response to [my] drivel. Don't even attempt to associate it with my argument." So let me get this straight, after several claims, above (and below), of me injecting this into your argument, you admit to bringing it up in response to "my drivel" and it has nothing to do with your argument. THANK YOU!!!! So the one point you brought up in the whole conversation does nothing to support your argument. Yet despite your bringing it up, I injected it into your argument? LMAO!!!!
So lets
1) Replacing a character with of one race with a character of the same race.
So if you don't have issue with a Black character replacing a Black Character, what did you mean when you said "BECAUSE HE HAS TO BE BLACK"? If this was not in response to Luc replacing David as per topic, yet linked to diversity for the sake of Diversity,explain how this "fabricated" interpretation clearly does not fit your intended objection.
2) Introducing a character abruptly (which can include replacing characters)
As you said, "[you] use one of the examples that [I] brought up to defeat the points that [I]" fab[r]icated. Which means is was "your" point! LMAO!!!!
- What i meant was that DC is having diversity simply for the sake of diversity.
- Diversity, simply for the sake of diversity is not limited to or necessarily associated with replacing a character with that of the same race, or introducing one repeatedly. Try again.
- It wasn't a point contained in my argument you imbecile However, i did use that "point" to point out how incoherent your drivel actually was.
I know this might be difficult for you to comprehend, but my comment about Luc needing to be Black for 50 years (not be 50s old but having existed in various forms for 50 years) was something called sarcasm. You used "my" fabricated argument regarding character integration to justify why Dick replacing Batman was okay vs Luc replacing David, in terms of racial scrutiny. So my question is that if Luc had been around as long as Dick was, would you stop crying that he replaced David. It is really a yes or no answer, you should be able to articulate at least that much (Y or N) with no issues, since elaboration on "diversity simply for the sake of diversity" is a bit much for you.
- To justify? No sir. I pointed out that the example you brought up was a poor example that couldn't properly defeat the points that you fabricated. I need to elaborate on a concept that an eleven year old could easily understand? Are you mentally retarded?
- If Luke had been around for 50 years in canon continuity and showed natural progression towards the role of Batwing (David would have had to be older than Luke in this scenario) , then it wouldn't be painfully obvious that DC was having diversity simply for the sake of diversity and then i might not have a problem.
Great post! Great arguments!
- Sure.
Considering you yourself already admitted the one point you brought up doesn't add you your argument, which you lack the ability to articulate upon, addressing this is moot.
Actually, and Ironically, the phrase is "Does your incompetence know no bounds". Its fitting this irony be turned back on someone trying to be witty in the face of their inability to understand sarcasm in regards to my terrorist reference being coincidental. But I completely love how you demonstrated how Simon being Arabic had nothing to do with him being Aribic, unlike Luc, who we know nothing about, is all about him being black. Great explanation!
- Actually, that wasn't the phrase i was using, and that is a question. English clearly isn't your first language.
- "Simon being Arabic had nothing to do with him being Arabic" Cute illogical drivel, it really puts your ignorance and incompetence on display.
The person who does not know how to expand their thoughts into a paragraph with supporting points and reasoning, shouldn't be talking about language. But you are right about "Simon being Arabic had nothing to do with him being Arabic", I meant "Simon being Arabic had nothing to do with DC wanting an Arabic character". I know you get easily confused and distracted, I'll be more careful in the future ... sugar.
I will point out that once again you have added a post with 0 value to support your argument... LOL!!!
Not at all, I know it is hard to keep up but I am pointing out that like Luc, Baz was introduced got recruited in the same issue, so I don't get how one could Forced and not the other. But perhaps, for clarity, you should share your definition of forced and elaboration on how Luc is forced and Baz is not. Or will you keep that to yourself like all the rest of the logic behind your arguments?
- You don't get how one could be forced and not the other? What does that have to do with me or anyone else who has a problem with the topic at hand? Tell me how we are bounded by your opinion?
- Oh, you mean the way that sinestro and Hal died so a replacement was imminent? You mean the way the ring was going to choose someone immediately regardless? You mean the way we knew that Hal and Sinestro would still be green lanterns in future issue? Yes, Luke must be less forced than Bazz. However, you'll probably stick with your opinion regardless of what i say so i'm probably wasting my time here as you seem to think your opinion is fact from time to time.
OMG, what is this, are you actually attempting to defend your stance? So tell me, have you read JLA? Because if you did, you would know that Batman and Cyborg had a list of potential candidates that was never revealed to the readers until they suddenly called on them. So Batman having Luc as an unknown candidate is actually along the same lines as the way some of the JL reserves were called in. So based on how some of the new JL members were introduced, this is in character for Batman. Just as Simon's introduction is in line with the Green Lanterns. And what relevance does whether or not Sinestro/Hal stay a green lantern have on whether or not Baz was forced? If David stayed on the team in some manner would you find "Luke" less forced?
Feel free to counter by explaining why Baz was not forced but Luc is then sweetheart. And there should be no surprises since you lack the ability to even elaborate on your own points, I'm not even sure you know what your getting at.
- "Sweetheart"? Don't flatter yourself child.
- If only the likes of you could provide something that i needed to counter.
Don't worry, there is nothing flattering about you sweetheart.
Great rebuttal that adds nothing to the argument, oh wait, that is your specialty. Paragraph corrected. Whether or no someone has an issue with the diversity of the team, wasn't the main focus, it was the fact DC makes drastic changes to other titles. But I would be baffled even more than here if someone turned that into a race issue.
- You would be baffled if people turned race changes into a race issue? Surprise, surprise.
LMAO! Like I said comprehension ... I was referring to someone making a race issue based on the changes of the team. I keep forgetting you can't remember more than one response back. Here is the sentence with the said correction.
"Even the recent Stormwatch issue had a reboot for instance (which used a timeline change to suddenly reboot the characters, change roosters and story after the last storyline ended ... and without any build up at that). While the exact nuances are different it is similar that they gave a reboot of sorts to keep the series alive and did so in an abrupt manner. But no-one is trying to look through the changes in an attempt to call out diversity mandates, because these things happen."
I'm not sure if you even know what real reasoning is sweetheart.... just saying! But you're main argument here is I'm not worthy of your effort, yet you have spent several posts going through my posts one by one? LMAO!!!! So then are you admitting to not applying reasoning to your posts or something along those lines? LMAO!!!! THANKS FOR THIS!!!!
- I'm not sure if you even know that the word "real" is subjective and that your opinion of what "real reasoning" is is not a fact.
- My main argument was that DC is having diversity simply for the sake of diversity. However, you are incredibly ignorant and illiterate.
- You aren't worthy of having a debate with me and that's clear as day as you lack the brain capacity and common sense of an eight year old.
- You should be grateful that i'm entertaining your drivel in this "conversation".
But according to you, you didn't make any points because you don't need to explain yourself to me, and and since you didn't make any points and I fabricated them all, what would I possibly need to present to show you have nothing to support your argument when you yourself have all but claimed as much?
- I made my initial point that i thought DC was having diversity simply for the sake of diversity however, you're an illiterate imbecile.
- I'm not going to explain something that is common knowledge to you simply because you have the brain capacity of a fish, your parents can do that job.
- As if i needed something to support diversity for the sake of diversity. You simply lack common sense.
So let me explain this to you again. I used the first 2 Batgirls as example of characters where introduced in the same manner as Luc. They appeared out of nowhere and were integrated into the history of relatives that were linked to Batman, specifically 'allies' of his. This was only to show that Luc's sudden appearance was nothing new. This was in regards to your comments about character integration, not about keeping a character the same color, as I explained the Batmen were those examples (white to white), since these are separate concepts, I am using distinct examples of each element of your,sorry, my complaint. While Barbra replacing Bette does show an example of White replacing white, Cassandra taking up the mantle does not hurt my argument because I was never using Batgirl for my example of keeping a mantle a certain color.
- Maybe i would care if this wasn't a part of the drivel you fabricated into my argument. and it actually had something to do with Diversity simply for the sake of diversity.
So lets look and see
1) Replacing a character with of one race with a character of the same race.
So if you don't have issue with a Black character replacing a Black Character, what did you mean when you said "BECAUSE HE HAS TO BE BLACK"? If this was not in response to Luc replacing David as per topic, yet linked to diversity for the sake of Diversity,explain how this "fabricated" interpretation clearly does not fit your intended objection.
2) Introducing a character abruptly (which can include replacing characters)
As you said, "[you] use one of the examples that [I] brought up to defeat the points that [I]" fab[r]icated. Which means is was "your" point! LMAO!!!!
Still waiting sweetheart
- "Sweetheart" Again, don't flatter yourself.
- Yes, because Diversity simply for the sake is diversity is limited to a black character replacing a black character. Oh wait, it isn't.
- Again, it wasn't a point contained in my argument, but it was something i used to point out the flaws in the drivel you fabricated.
-Try again.
More of you notsupporting your arguments....surprise surprise...lol!
Great response, you're lack
of examples and proof and logic and deductive reasoning is so overwhelmingly LOL-able
- Being that i used your examples that you brought up to defeat points you fabricated to show you that they didn't defeat said points i didn't need any examples.
Great response, you're lack of examples and proof and logic and deductive reasoning is so overwhelmingly LOL-able
Then enlighten me sweetheart
- I'm not going to to educate you simply because you're an imbecile without common knowledge. That sounds like your parent's problem.
When I say "we" I really mean "you". But feel free to correct me by clearly explaining what "you" mean by "diversity only/simply for the sake of diversity".
- If you don't know something that is common knowledge you probably aren't even worthy of me entertaining your drivel in this idiotic conversation.
I'll tell you what is "hilarious": the only valid point you've made this discussion, required "me" to bold and underline for you, and still added nothing to your arguments. (hint: If you don't get the pun, try again in a few years.) LMAO!!!
Perhaps yo should elaborate on "your" definition of "diversity only/simply for the sake of diversity".
- Oh you determine what points are "valid" for all comic book readers and human beings alive? Oh you don't? Surprise, surprise.
- I've actually had one primary argument, but you're apparently to illiterate and incompetent to know what it was even after i've repeated it dozens of time. I think "LMAO!!" would be appropriate here if i were to use something from your apparently childish vocabulary.
- Perhaps you should get a bit of common sense.
More of you notsupporting your arguments....surprise surprise...lol!
Log in to comment