Banning and Warning Announcements

[Winston]

Publicduende is now banned for ignoring my warnings several times to stop claiming that all his opinions are facts. I gave him several warnings already. The fault squarely rests on him. He made very bad choices and never learned from them and has no conscience. I friggin hate sociopaths.

His account shows that he was banned for:

ignoring warnings to stop claiming your opinions are facts and never learning from your mistakes and your insensitivity and immorality and lying. many sins and transgressions.

See here:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=37682&p=314204#p314204

[Winston]

Something everyone in the whole world knows except Publicduende:

There are some things that are objective facts, for instance:

1. Paris is the capitol of France.
2. WW2 ended in 1945.
3. Water boils at x temperature.
Etc.

However, something like "X person cannot get any dates or girls in x country" is NOT, ABSOLUTELY NOT, an objective fact.

That the whole world understands this except PD, including the dumbest people on earth, speaks volumes about him.

[gsjackson]

Winston, are you nuts? That's ridiculous. Let him back in right now. He called it as he saw it. Maybe that makes him myopic, but so are we all to some extent.

[Ghost]

.

[Cornfed]

It seemed like a silly and unnecessary argument to me.

[Winston]

Winston, are you nuts? That's ridiculous. Let him back in right now. He called it as he saw it. Maybe that makes him myopic, but so are we all to some extent.

Nothing wrong with having an opinion, but one needs to state it as an opinion, not as an objective fact. That's wrong and technically a lie to state your opinion as though it were fact on a subjective matter in which everyone has a different experience.

Furthermore, he acts like he enjoys hurting people, like a sociopath.

No one states their opinion as fact on these matters. You know that.

Plus he was warned several times, including one last time. Instead of apologizing and retracting his extreme claims, he insulted me further. That's it. That's crossing the line.

If a man gives you a warning, you heed it and apologize. You don't insult him further. That's a big no no. You know that. What if someone insulted you on your forum and ignored your warnings? How would you handle it?

I gave him a chance to apologize. But he didn't take it. He's not wise or smart and his people skills are HORRIBLE.

He definitely asked for it. Not me.

[Winston]

@gsjackson
Do you understand this difference?

These are objective facts:

1. Paris is the capitol of France.
2. WW2 ended in 1945.
3. Water boils at x temperature.
4. 2+2=4
5. White cars are easier to see in the dark then black cars are.
6. Stick shift cars are more fuel efficient than manual transmission cars.
7. It rains more often in Seattle than in Los Angeles.
8. Antarctica is colder in temperature than Los Angeles is.
Etc.

However, something like "X person cannot get any dates or girls in x country or x continent" is NOT, ABSOLUTELY NOT, an objective fact. Especially when x person has gotten many dates in many countries before in the past! And is considered charming by many foreign women!

Do you understand that? Yes or no?

If so then why does a f***ing moron like PD not understand that and refuses to admit that ever?! WTF is his f***ing problem? f**k!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[gsjackson]

He's a European pessimist. He condemned himself to the same sort of grim dating prognosis, until circumstances intervened and he had to button it up. You had no business warning him for speaking his mind. Why would he post here if he can't do that? He's a very intelligent guy, and this forum isn't exactly overrun with such types.

[Winston]

He's a European pessimist. He condemned himself to the same sort of grim dating prognosis, until circumstances intervened and he had to button it up. You had no business warning him for speaking his mind. Why would he post here if he can't do that? He's a very intelligent guy, and this forum isn't exactly overrun with such types.

Because it's wrong and a lie to state your opinion as fact. It's technically a lie. How would you feel if he did that about you?

Can you answer my question above in the previous post?

Anyone is welcome to share their opinion. But not as a fact. Especially when it comes to predicting the future or predicting what millions of strangers will think. Do you understand that?

Even the best psychics are only 75 percent accurate in their predictions.

To claim 100 percent accuracy is a lie and a fraud. Right? Understand?

[Winston]

Hopefully it's just temporary and you can let him back in after you guys cool off.

It's possible he could be let back in if he apologizes and retracts his lies. But the problem is, he's super stubborn and thinks he is God and refuses to admit he's ever wrong, even when the whole world can see that he is, and even when he's been proven wrong. He also is hurtful and insensitive and refuses to heed warnings, which is stupid, cruel and foolish. Even Rock said he's toxic like Repatriate and only wants to bring others down.

No good man would try to make others feel like shit or bring them down or hurt them. Only evil people do that. Even the best psychics only have a 75 percent accuracy rating. But this man claims 100 percent accuracy. Thus he must be a liar. There's no way around it. And he refuses to budge on his delusions even though the whole world can see that he's full of it.

That's wacko off the charts don't you think?

Also don't you think it's insane for someone to claim to speak for all women on a whole continent? It's utterly insane of course. No one would do that. Only a total psycho would.

Especially since I've had hundreds of dates in many countries and many women find me charming, etc which we all know and is well established. Yet he denies that. He might as well claim that no one died in Vietnam or WW2. It'd make just about as much sense.

[Ghost]

.

[Winston]

I didn't follow the exchanges between you and PD, so I don't know all the details. Maybe it would be best for you two to agree to a moratorium on that one topic.

You dont need to follow a conversation to know that its wrong for a man to claim that "x person cannot get any dates in x continent" as an objective fact right? Its simply wrong and a no brainer.

You do agree that for a man to state his opinions about another man's future, as though it were a fact like 2+2=4, is simply wrong and insane right?

And that for a man to claim to represent and speak for all the millions of women on a whole continent like Europe is wrong too right?

Especially when it concerns a man like our Winston Wu who has dated hundreds of girls and is obviously good at getting dates based on his history, and is considered charming to some women. Just ask Dianne. Or even Rock. He's seen me in action and can verify that some women find me charming and likable.

And you agree that every general rule has exceptions right? Thus even if 99 percent of women in x country don't like me, and one percent does, one percent is still a lot of people right? Even if it was 0.01 percent of women, that's still quite a few women to choose from.

All these concepts are very simple right? Even if you didn't follow the discussion. They are a no brainer, and no sane person would debate them. Only a fool would contest the above common sense examples. Don't you agree?

[Winston]

@gsjackson and @Ghost,

How would you feel if I told you the following:

"I represent all the millions of women in China. You will not get any dates there at all. None of them will like you. Not even one. There are no exceptions. This is a FACT, as certain as 2+2=4, as certain as the sun will rise tomorrow. I will never budge on this. It's the truth. I have nothing to apologize or retract. There is no debate on this. This is the absolute extreme truth."

How would you feel if I said that to you? And refused to budge or see the obvious problem with that? Wouldn't you think I was batshit insane?

Tell me honestly.

gsjackson, this is how you express an opinion:

"I think it may be difficult for you to get dates in x country. At least not with attractive women. But there are always exceptions to every general rule. And sometimes you may get lucky too. Also there are lesser attractive women who may date you too. That's my honest opinion."

Do you see the difference between that and the way PD voices his "opinion" as though it were as factual as "There are 12 inches in a foot"?

Do you see now? Tell me the truth please. Don't be shy or afraid to voice your honest opinion or answer to my question.

[Winston]

3 Lessons to learn here from PD's insane, horrifying, twilight zone like behavior:

1. No man can state his opinion about another man's future or how he will do in x country or x continent, as though it were a fact like 2+2=4. That's totally insane. Even the best psychics claim only a 75 percent accuracy rate, not 100 percent. Anyone who claims that has lost his marbles clearly.

2. No man can claim to represent and speak for all the millions of women on a whole continent, such as Europe. Any man who claims that is either a liar or insane. No way around it.

Especially when it concerns a man like our Winston Wu who has dated hundreds of girls and is obviously good at getting dates based on his history, and is considered charming to some women. Just ask Dianne. Or even Rock. He's seen me in action and can verify that some women find me charming and likable.

3. Every general rule has exceptions. Even if 99 percent of women in x country don't like me, and one percent does, one percent is still a LOT of people. Even if it was 0.01 percent of women, that's still quite a few women to choose from. Definitely not zero.

Especially for a man like Winston Wu with a track record of getting hundreds and is obviously GOOD at it based on his long history, all of which can be easily verified, and thus is far more REAL and convincing than one random man's PURE speculation and opinion. There's no comparison. Thus the probability of Winston getting some dates (even if not a lot) is very HIGH and probable. Not zero as PD claims. No one will bet against it, not even PD.

The fact that the man had the audacity to try to contest the above, which are universally agreed upon, is batshit insane and speaks volumes about his insanity or dishonest. No way around it. It's indefensible. Case closed.

[Cornfed]

But aren’t there merits to probabilistic opinions? If commenting on someone’s plan to pay his debts by winning the lottery in the next month or Homer Simpson’s plan to pass an exam by hiding under a pile of coats and hoping everything turned out alright, wouldn’t it be valid to say that those were stupid ideas, even though there is some remote possibility that they might actually work.