BananaBender:


Where did you get your "whole different meaning as regards marriage"?? The bible??

SirShymex:


Interesting story.

However, regardless of how well they mean - it's always better to keep certain private issues in the private. Because outsiders won't be privy to the dynamics of what's actually going on, apart from hearsay. And with that, people will always tell stories in a way that will favour them - that's just how it's

SirShymex:
[s][/s]

Sod off, bummy illiterate!

Go read the tutoring I gave ya butt buddy.

If you can't read - get someone to translate my posts to ya local dialect.

crackhaus:
Lol @Yields giving me an ar.se-whooping.

When you ask someone a simple question about how organizations like WHO get their statistics if not by personal evidence/report/experience of a representational test group, and that person can't answer the question in two subsequent posts and still end up disappearing totally without answering... according to shymexx, that person has whooped my ar.se.

You must really love the taste of cvnt...

crackhaus:

When you resort to including fathers, mothers, and lineage in your caustic rebuttals as is usual with you, it always reminds me of your halfwitted intellectual capacity to follow-through on your arguments.

That's how much of a mess you are.

Bummy illiterate? Butt buddy?
Aren't these already overused by you on this thread?

Pick up your dictionary Mr 'submissiveness' is medieval but 'submission' is ok.

babygirlfl:
Shinatu and SirShymex, I have enjoyed the dialogue between the two of you. Shinatu you asked the questions that I would have asked. Sirshymex, some of your post was really nice.

SirShymex:
Flaming phaggot picking-a-beau and the biggest cheer-leader on NL.

Two characteristics of females, what an effeminate and emasculated mangina you're.

I'm your nemesis on this forum, you homoerotic damaged goods!

SirShymex:
Lmao...I can't take you seriously when the two sensible words in your posts are words I brought to this forum.

I brought "pseudo-intellectual" and "spout" to the forum, and before I came here, people never used those words.

You're done, phhagot!

Out for now, till someone intelligent quotes me for something sensible.

all4naija:
I smear trouble, mister! Lot of trouble!

SirShymex:


Lmao...these fvckers on here think I'm a softie because I have been controlling myself a little bit. The same guy that used to go against the whole politics section verbally and intellectually loool.

I just need to ra.pe a few of them just to send a clear message. Don't quote me with ad hominem and homoerotic cheerleaders. And I don't do famzing apart from flirting with chics, and chatting to posters I have known for time.

all4naija:
What are you talking about? Jeez! Are you seriously saying that you're cowboy?! Ride on boy! I think I can handle it.

SirShymex:


Lmao...muthaphuck these non-English speaking primeval village bums. I just had to put my foot in their ar.ses.

Anyway, where have you been my favourite light-skinned nyggah from Ibadan? You know you still need extra melanin to become certified, right?

I have always been here. I can not miss the schmucks in this forum because they make me laugh all day. Ain't nigger!

all4naija:
I have always been here. I can not miss the schmucks in this forum because they make me laugh all day. Ain't nigger!

Yields:

I did not answer your question? Are you this stupi'd, dude? I already told you they use statistical evidence (and once again, you get this by using the research method), NOT personal experience. Am I writing in French or Portuguese? I was the one who mentioned "representatives" yesterday, you had no clue what it was based on your claim, but all of a sudden you've included it in your statement now. This was what I meant by you being slick and changing your words to align with mine, after the fact. I gave you a response but you just want to keep barking that I didn't because you have no argument. If you still do not understand a simple concept, then your case is beyond educational intervention. You claimed you knew Stats, I threw some terms at you and also explained, but your idiotic responses emphasized your unfamiliarity with the Stats you claimed to know. I didn't disappear; I was just tired and bored of talking to you, point blank. I lose interest when talking to deliberate idi0ts.

You acquire it via the research method. It depends on the type of research design and techniques being used. In simple terms, it is sound evidence that proves a proposition to be true. Good research studies should be transparent. Transparency, in this case, means: you must provide proof of evidence/how you got your results or conclusions when required. You cannot assume, hide evidence, give false explanations, change the conclusions later on your own terms, etc.

SirShymex:

Can we please do a recap of who started the name calling between you and I? I bet you thought I'm a slouch due to the lid I put on cursing people out, no? And you even cited 50cali...when I'm everyone's nemesis in the hell-fire that the politics section is. When it comes to verbal assault, I slay pillocks like you for a living.

Recap now:

- I posted my comment based on my understanding of the subject-matter, and my beliefs.

- TV01 quoted me and asserted that I was contradicting myself.

- Then I replied with my position that you can have "submission" in a relationship, without your partner necessarily being "submissive." He got it, and moved on.

- However, you had to jump in to redeem yourself after making a fool of yourself by asserting that submissiveness doesn't mean docility. And it took you 24 hours to do that, cos I saw you online all through yesterday. Today you started by posting submission vs submissiveness as your retort. Citing intellectualism when I never alluded to it in my discourse with TV01. With the phaggot pick-a-beau playing the cheer-leader. You both started the name-calling there.

- Saw that today and addressed it comprehensively by citing the nuances in the meaning and applications of both words in relationship/marriage setting. And subsequently returned the favour with the name-calling the both of you started.

- Then you saw ya butt buddy getting his phaggot ar.se whooped, and decided to join in the fray. And I got busy and smacked the both of you together - both verbally and intellectually.

So, cry me a river. Next time, watch those you get belligerent with. I will fvck you so bad your brain would become permanently impaired due to severe assault. Just because I toned it down a bit - that doesn't mean I won't crack ya skull open. And I don't do famzing.

crackhaus:

Keep shooting yourself and now going with the claim that you were bored and loosing interest.

This was your response:



And I subsequently asked (with reference to the bit in bold), how is this proof of evidence arrived at dumbo? Is it a computer that generates the numbers from thin air or does the evidence come from a test group of people?

My own stats came from my own experience, you're yet to give yours genius. Or you have none, but see fit to discredit mine without correcting it with your own stats...deliberate stvpidity becomes you.

And what's that hogwash about you using 'representatives'? Another claim?
Care to quote where you used the word cos I honestly can't recall where you did...remember you're yet to quote the two comments I made that have different meanings according to you.

Idiocy seems more your forte. My stats are wrong but you are yet to give yours, so what exactly are you comparing my wrong stats with? You're about to make a bigger f0ol of yourself!

crackhaus:

Are you going to deny you threw first punch, or do you want me to go back and quote your very first reply to me on this thread? Not that I'm complaining azzhole.

Your intelligence is about to phuck you up.

You say you're everyone's nemesis? Still with the delusions I see.
FYI c0cksvcker, I'm not your regular 'everyone'...you are incapable of being my nemesis, and on an anonymous forum no less where it would count for nothing.
You're both petty and pitiable for thumping your chest on here...

Speech!

Utterly nauseating and besides the point...and yes, submissiveness doesn't mean docility in the context of marriage - you best get this chemically ingrained in your halfwitted-sugar-solution-for-brains skull.

So once again you go on a tangent about me not replying you on time...bytch keep your misguided sense of worth to yourself, I can reply you whenever I damn well feel like.
Unlike you, I do not consider a status here more important than in the real world.
Your ghetto rants and supposedly claimed street cred means nothing on here especially when you have to bring it up every time...seems a lot like you trying too hard to be badazz.

Submissiveness and submission mean the same thing basically...you're yet to define both and spot the difference genius.

Dude I formally welcome you to the process of trying to e-assault me into an e-coma...you're a joke, and not a funny one at that.

Word of advice, I will keep calling you out on your slip-ups whenever I damn well feel like and hound you like the intellectually halfwitted bytch that you are...so be vigilant.
Ahaaaa...seems you love that word 'phaggot' a little too much, you should try it out sometime... I'm sure you'll love it.

Submissiveness is medieval but submission is fine...this is how a self-acclaimed intellectual thinks.

crackhaus:

Are you going to deny you threw first punch, or do you want me to go back and quote your very first reply to me on this thread? Not that I'm complaining azzhole.

Your intelligence is about to phuck you up.

You say you're everyone's nemesis? Still with the delusions I see.
FYI c0cksvcker, I'm not your regular 'everyone'...you are incapable of being my nemesis, and on an anonymous forum no less where it would count for nothing.
You're both petty and pitiable for thumping your chest on here...

Speech!

Utterly nauseating and besides the point...and yes, submissiveness doesn't mean docility in the context of marriage - you best get this chemically ingrained in your halfwitted-sugar-solution-for-brains skull.

So once again you go on a tangent about me not replying you on time...bytch keep your misguided sense of worth to yourself, I can reply you whenever I damn well feel like.
Unlike you, I do not consider a status here more important than in the real world.
Your ghetto rants and supposedly claimed street cred means nothing on here especially when you have to bring it up every time...seems a lot like you trying too hard to be badazz.

Submissiveness and submission mean the same thing basically...you're yet to define both and spot the difference genius.

Dude I formally welcome you to the process of trying to e-assault me into an e-coma...you're a joke, and not a funny one at that.

Word of advice, I will keep calling you out on your slip-ups whenever I damn well feel like and hound you like the intellectually halfwitted bytch that you are...so be vigilant.
Ahaaaa...seems you love that word 'phaggot' a little too much, you should try it out sometime... I'm sure you'll love it.

Submissiveness is medieval but submission is fine...this is how a self-acclaimed intellectual thinks.

crackhaus:

Keep shooting yourself and now going with the claim that you were bored and loosing interest.

This was your response:

Stillfire:


You have said it alllllllllllllllllllll!
I wanted to reply the rubbish OP statements and following ones, but I won't waste a single brain cell on it. Too much productive energy would be wasted doing that.