lux

uh, this is awesome

You wasted an entire post of 15 lines to say what I had also said in two lines, namely that my first comment had a provocative tone (but nothing insurmountable; I've personally dealt with far worse) and that I was wrong to frame it that way. That said, I genuinely wanted to know about those nice statistics, but now if I say potatoes you reply beans. The psychologist, when you think about it, would be useful for everyone, and I wouldn't refuse a nice free session, not just to satisfy my curiosities. However, you should learn to stay on topic, without veering off into Maiden and alleged and false ignorances of others.

Yes, Judge...Enforcer.

Read post No. 40 Judge. And then my subsequent one. I have been asking CptGaio in vain for 50 posts to see these statistics, but in response, I received a string of, um, compliments and unsolicited advice... not exactly requested. Even if my comment No. 42 could be seen as provocative, Cpt's reaction is at the very least odd, as well as hysterical.

"You no longer know where to hold on: the point is that I was convinced you weren't reading my posts, now I know you just don't understand them"--- there’s nothing to understand: there's no trace of statistics. Your mental gymnastics about me are speculations you cling to quickly to avoid replying to me.

Ah, but you're still writing, Cpt Buffone? Didn't you say you were going to remove the notifications from this review? Yes, just like the last cigarette... Mr. Bla, Bla, Bla... But where are these statistics, where are they? We're all eagerly waiting, but you keep rambling nonsense, suggesting I see a psychologist (me, huh?), talking nonsense and insulting (now in a really explicit manner, and I won't hold back from now on), continuing to divert attention from the focal point of the discussion, focusing on me. You see, the point is that I'm busting my ass trying to study and understand something with Chi-squared, univariate and bivariate analysis in statistics, while you, the fraud that you are, take the trouble to fill that shit-filled mouth of yours with the term "statistics." You wouldn't even be able to calculate the arithmetic mean with a calculator. I repeat, you are a fraud.

Alright, let's leave it be, or I’ll really come off as an asshole.

But wasn't the last post supposed to be the one before this? Well… aside from the fact that "ignorante" primarily means "not knowing," so you called me ignorant in the full sense, aside from the fact that I showed you that you were talking nonsense because I know and have listened to the Maiden, aside from the fact that I would gladly revisit the previous debate we had weeks ago a million times because your foolish generalization encompassed anyone who fell into the category of "average indie rock listeners" (and you should know that generalizations can be very dangerous), aside from the fact that you use the sad tactic of not picking up on my last observations that I present post by post, but limit yourself to saying that I have a straw man, that I'm like this, that I'm like that, that I'm a braggart and blah blah blah, aside from the fact that I even acknowledged that instead of asking you what the mean squared error was, it would have been better if I had asked you to talk to me directly about your statistics (so you wouldn’t have had childish excuses not to answer me)…

"Ps: I'm never coming back to this page." Are you trying to make me cry?

I've read post 50 eighty times, and the 51 too, but SSSero statistics. I've even granted you the freedom to call me ignorant and I've even shrugged it off. But at least avoid treating your interlocutors like they're slow, in your sad attempt to make them believe that donkeys can fly, thanks.