Colorado gun bills: Senate gives nod to magazine ammo limit after six hour debate

[apocalypsehow]

48. We've already been over this; but such a reply was predictable (and *predicted*) as the day is long:

"Now, I know I'm going to get the predictable reply, "they've decided it's a waste of time arguing with you; you offer nothing in the debate; blah, blah, blah," anything other than the plain truth, i.e., they simply can't handle debating a poster who runs circles around them consistently."

Link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014419873#post41

No, the fact of the matter is they simply cannot handle debate with a poster who constantly & consistently brings facts they cannot refute. We can go round & round on this silly circle, but the point of my first reply was not to argue about why they've run off to the proverbial hills using the *ignore* button, but that they have, while you have not. Indeed, I even inserted the disclaimer above in that very first reply.

But that you insist on taking off on that predictable tangent is why internet "discussion" so often fails: you want to argue that the reason your pals have fled and are hiding behind the *ignore* button is not because I could possibly be right in any way, shape or form, but because I'm wrong in some fashion. And you even manage to insert a personal attack into your absurd analysis:

"it has more to do with your rudeness, insults and immaturity"

So, what's starts out as an attempt to compliment you for sticking around to talk while the rest of your buddies have run off quickly devolves into an attempt on your part to defend them - and, hence, your dubious cause - by indulging in pedestrian personal attacks. You can't just accept the observation that they're gone and you're not and move on: it's gotta be another opportunity to snark and posture and, well, engage in "rudeness, insults, and immaturity."

Funny stuff.

The anonymous internet discussion board literally is the place of the never-ending push on open doors.