VeganDiet's forum posts

#1 Posted by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

@super_soldierxii: I love how you have this condescending attitude, yet you turn into a whining child so quickly. Asking someone who is lying about comic book characters why they are doing so sounds reasonable to me.

If doing so makes me a dick, so be it. At least I'm not spouting off misinformation while copping a condescending attitude as if I were king sh!t.

Also, wasn't aware this thread had a one d!ck limit. Since you're leaving, does that mean I get to stick around?

#2 Edited by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

@visemoon: Fair enough, but if you'll look back, I didn't call him a liar. I asked him why he was lying about what he'd said. He could have responded saying he was misinformed or that he had made a mistake, but instead he decided to get defensive and call me a dick.

#3 Posted by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

@visemoon: He gave out incorrect information in a debate. You can't have an actual debate if you can't trust the person you're debating against to speak factually.

If you don't know something for certain, then you shouldn't posit it as fact.

#4 Posted by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

@vegandiet:

I wasn't guessing. I knew what era it was. And, dude, anyone with functioning eyes could tell that wasn't from the 90s.

And I did do my homework, I already knew what issue that image was from, as I've read that issue numerous times. I own that comic digitally, but it doesn't say the year it was published on it.

And you absolutely did lie. You attempted to refute laflux's point with something that wasn't true. That's lying.

Sorry that you don't appreciate being called out on it.

If you look at all the other comic references I gave laflux, you'll notice they are all early 80's. From the Firelord showing, to the Secret Wars blurb ... I should have stated the 80's as that era is clearly what I was referencing despite. It was a mistake. I clearly intended the 80's. You're right, anyone with functioning eyes could tell.

But hey, don't apologize. Easy to sit in the sidelines and call folks out on their mistakes.

And clearly, you're not sorry but rather being facetious ... if you're not really sorry, why would you lie dude? You're so evil.

Wooo, someone's getting salty.

Evil? Sure, why not, but I'm not the one who lied in a debate about comic characters, then whined when I got called out on it.

#5 Posted by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

The Topper #187

@vegandiet said:
@super_soldierxii said:

@laflux:

That scan is from what, 1970 something? Peter is significantly above where he was at the time, as much as to say that Spider-Man now would stomp Spider-Man back then 10/10. I guess its a good indication of striking strength, but Peter tends to exaggerate so even then......... >:). See no PIS or WIS invlolved :p

Nope. 1990's. And here come the justifications on cue!! Lol. Predictable.

Yeah, that's not true. It is from the 70s, or maybe very, very early 80s, but it's clearly not from the 90s. Why would you lie about that?

Dude ... here you are, guessing at it yourself (um, it's the 70's, or maybe the 80's), then calling me a liar. Your guess happened to be closer to the web page that I pilfered the image from is all.

You want to come on here and call someone a liar, then do your f'n homework first. At best, I should have done mine. But you should have also if you want to call someone a liar and be a d!ck about it.

Amazing Spider-Man issue # 187 December 1978. Had you come on here, and written that down instead, I would have apologized about having been misinformed (the internet is oh so rife with perfect info).

I wasn't guessing. I knew what era it was. And, dude, anyone with functioning eyes could tell that wasn't from the 90s.

And I did do my homework, I already knew what issue that image was from, as I've read that issue numerous times. I own that comic digitally, but it doesn't say the year it was published on it.

And you absolutely did lie. You attempted to refute laflux's point with something that wasn't true. That's lying.

Sorry that you don't appreciate being called out on it.

#6 Posted by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

@laflux:

That scan is from what, 1970 something? Peter is significantly above where he was at the time, as much as to say that Spider-Man now would stomp Spider-Man back then 10/10. I guess its a good indication of striking strength, but Peter tends to exaggerate so even then......... >:). See no PIS or WIS invlolved :p

Nope. 1990's. And here come the justifications on cue!! Lol. Predictable.

Yeah, that's not true. It is from the 70s, or maybe very, very early 80s, but it's clearly not from the 90s. Why would you lie about that?

#7 Edited by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

Oh, lord.

#8 Posted by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

@zarius: How do you know he's not a long time Spider-man fan? I've read what most would consider all of classic spidey and I still enjoy his relationship with Silk.

No one on this thread has been able to put up a good argument of what's wrong with casual sex between consenting adults. It's like everyone has this idea that Peter is this perfect person which is totally untrue. Anyone who has read classic spidey knows how flawed of a person he started out as.

Because the whole business with the spider-pheromones really makes the consenting part of your statement very murky.

#9 Posted by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio

@jashro44 said:

@vegandiet said:

And the big instance in which he managed to tag Peter was written by Jeph Loeb so it needs to be taken with an Everest-sized grain of salt.

Was this when hope was shooting at Peter?

Yeah that's the one. So, there's numerous mitigating factors to that showing.

#10 Posted by VeganDiet (1155 posts) - - Show Bio
@copete said:

Cyclops. Already has tagged Spider_man and his blasts would put him out.

Dok Oc is going down faster than I can finish a 20 piece bucket at Popeyes! (very fast!)

Spider-man has been capable of dodging Scott's shots more often than Scott has managed to tag him.

And the big instance in which he managed to tag Peter was written by Jeph Loeb so it needs to be taken with an Everest-sized grain of salt.