Merged Bitcoin - Part 3

psionl0 said:
You must be using the word "shock" differently as in it is something bad. I don't disagree with that notion but Merriam Webster describes "shock" as "to strike with surprise, terror, horror, or disgust".

Now are you going to tell me that you were surprised to hear that crypto scams exist?
Click to expand...

You need to contemplate the meaning of the word “or”.

The only thing that shocks me is how fraudulent companies like FTX can get valuations of billions despite having almost no assets and how people who should know better get scammed by them.

However, I’m not surprised.
 
psionl0 said:
It isn't a shock if you know it's happening (or going to happen).

But by all means, let's redefine "shock" so that you can claim that I am wrong. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

But you just posted a definition in which surprise is not necessary for shock.

“but Merriam Webster describes "shock" as "to strike with surprise, terror, horror, or disgust”

I think disgust is the one that describes how I feel about FTX etc. very little surprises me about anything that involves large amounts of money, not since I read the Big Short, anyway.
 
psionl0 said:
You are just trying to alter the meaning of my post because you can't deal with the actual content.
Click to expand...

Nope. You posted a definition of shock that listed several things it could be and used the word "or" in the list.

In the English language, which is what I assume we use on this forum - not psionl0ish - when you use "or" instead of "and", it means "any one of them" not "all of them". If anybody is changing the meaning of what you quoted in your post, it is you because you realise Merriam Webster does not support your position.
 
jeremyp said:
Nope. You posted a definition of shock that listed several things it could be and used the word "or" in the list.

In the English language, which is what I assume we use on this forum - not psionl0ish - when you use "or" instead of "and", it means "any one of them" not "all of them". If anybody is changing the meaning of what you quoted in your post, it is you because you realise Merriam Webster does not support your position.
Click to expand...
Like I said, You are just trying to alter the meaning of my post because you can't deal with the actual content.

When I realized that the poster I was responding to used the word "shocked" differently I clarified my answer. You obviously don't want to deal with that clarification so you are attempting a technical "gotcha" instead.
 
psionl0 said:
Like I said, You are just trying to alter the meaning of my post because you can't deal with the actual content.
Click to expand...
I understood the content perfectly. You may need to consider putting more thought into your posts if they don't say what you mean.
When I realized that the poster I was responding to used the word "shocked" differently I clarified my answer. You obviously don't want to deal with that clarification so you are attempting a technical "gotcha" instead.
Click to expand...
You didn't clarify your answer. You tried to prove his definition of "shocked" wrong, by quoting a dictionary entry that supports his case, not yours.

Now you are trying to move the goalposts and I'm not letting you.
 
psionl0 said:
You don't even understand that "or" doesn't mean "and not". You are just trying to cherry pick a definition of "shock" that doesn't include "surprise".

You are embarrassing yourself.
Click to expand...

Now you are being dishonest. The point is not that "or" means "and not", it means "any one (or more) of".

In fact, I stated that in one of my previous posts.

At this point, you are outright lying.

Or maybe just not capable of reading for comprehension. Either way, you are not doing well.
 
psionl0 said:
This is the 5th post where you are trying to say I didn't mean "surprise" when I used the word "shock".

How many rounds are you going to go with the reading my mind bit?
Click to expand...

You realize that this all started when you decided that another poster's usage of "shock" must have meant "surprise" despite the poster and the dictionary assuring you that is not the case, right?
 
wareyin said:
No, just pointing out that your attempted gaslighting is evident to all, not just to the previous 2 posters pointing it out to you.
Click to expand...
No this is just a figment or your imagination. You two are competing with each other to see who can be more ridiculous.
 
Are we seeing the emergence of the pscam here? The scam that's not a scam because it's a pscam? And of the pthesaurus as well, where one looks up a thesaurus, and claims what one has found in there oneself is exactly the opposite of what it all really means?

This is all pbrilliant.
 
Chanakya said:
Are we seeing the emergence of the pscam here? The scam that's not a scam because it's a pscam? And of the pthesaurus as well, where one looks up a thesaurus, and claims what one has found in there oneself is exactly the opposite of what it all really means?

This is all pbrilliant.
Click to expand...

I think it's a scam that's not a scam because theoretically there could be some transaction that's not a scam, and can we please stop talking about the scams even though that's the majority of usage, and hey, look over there a squirrel! But don't be surprised!
 
wareyin said:
I think it's a scam that's not a scam because theoretically there could be some transaction that's not a scam, and can we please stop talking about the scams even though that's the majority of usage, and hey, look over there a squirrel! But don't be surprised!
Click to expand...
It's not surprising that you are posting nonsense like this. You don't know what you are talking about in this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom