b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 9051922 (Thread)

# was that
funny?

looks like i need loads of gene therapy to laugh at you...
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 14:44, archived)
# The problem is
your entire humour seems to be "bums and willies are funny".

Let me guess - you got a modem for Xmas.
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 14:45, archived)
# I doubt it.
a modem convers digital signals in to analog and back again. broadband connections are digital anyway so a modulator/demodulator wouldn't be needed:P
I think it's more of a case of him being allowed to interact with the public with that little dobby stick attacked to his forehead so he can use the keyboard.
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 14:49, archived)
# i think you'll find modulation is extremely useful if you care about bandwidth in a frequency sense
also all digital signals exist in the analog domain

lern2geeknooblar
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:06, archived)
# also by convention
cable modems are still called modems even though they don't mo or dem.

in a related fact - MP3 codecs usually only dec, they rarely co.
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 20:35, archived)
# you
haven't seen "my entire humour" ...only a few posts here

silly billy
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:10, archived)
# was that
funny?

looks like i need loads of gene therapy to laugh at you...
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 20:35, archived)
# seems that way - you're proving my point excellently.
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 14:46, archived)
# Why do I get the impression he is no longer of this forum?:P
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:03, archived)
# because
you are prone to being wrong
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:08, archived)
# i love you
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:08, archived)
# Actually I was incorrect just the once, that just makes you a poor judge.
Sometimes it's easy to confuse people absence with they being off licking their wounds.
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:25, archived)
# no
you are simply prone to being wrong more often that you realise

i win

(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:30, archived)
# Yes. Erm obviously.
There's no reasoning with someone without reason.
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 16:13, archived)
# That's
an ambiguous sentence.

You would have been better to type, "There is no reasoning with someone who is unable to reason."

As it stands, you leave open the possibility that reason itself is the thing that you are stating must be present (rather than merely the ability to reason on the part of he with whom you are arguing).

3/10. Must troll harder.
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 16:24, archived)
# I see what you've done there.
But grouping random words doesn't actually mean you've made anything cohereant.
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 14:46, archived)
# it does have structure
those words are hardly random but I see your point
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:25, archived)
# i'll second everything that you type
you could be the new messiah
(, Fri 26 Dec 2008, 15:02, archived)