He clearly indicated that his use of such language was intentional. He also admitted to lying in an attempt to harm my reputation. So while I cannot be sure—no one can be except himself—a Bayesian approach would point to probabilistic likelihood of deliberate use of provocative ad hominem language as a trolling technique.
a Bayesian approach would point to probabilistic likelihood of deliberate use of provocative ad hominem language as a trolling technique.
LOL. You’re on LW, y’know, not Lifehack. People like me will look at you taking a random collection of keywords, throwing them all into a blender set on high, and then regurgitating them onto a page—and be not impressed.
To quote My Cousin Vinny, ”...everything that guy just said is bullshit” X-)
You don’t think he actually finds you creepy? Are you sure?
He clearly indicated that his use of such language was intentional. He also admitted to lying in an attempt to harm my reputation. So while I cannot be sure—no one can be except himself—a Bayesian approach would point to probabilistic likelihood of deliberate use of provocative ad hominem language as a trolling technique.
LOL. You’re on LW, y’know, not Lifehack. People like me will look at you taking a random collection of keywords, throwing them all into a blender set on high, and then regurgitating them onto a page—and be not impressed.
To quote My Cousin Vinny, ”...everything that guy just said is bullshit” X-)
Don’t be dismissive. If you disagree, make an actual argument and lay out your disagreements. Thanks!
Why not? A lot of things ought be dismissed.