Yereslov's Immortal
Sort:
mrguy888 wrote:
He did not tell any lies. He never claimed to be giving anything but his own opinion. Therefore what he said was not false and not slander.
Continuing to say he was slandering you would be slandering him, by constrast. You would be maliciously defaming him for something he didn't do.
The rules state not to attack other users.
Stop trying to justify it with your own opinions.
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
He did not tell any lies. He never claimed to be giving anything but his own opinion. Therefore what he said was not false and not slander.
Continuing to say he was slandering you would be slandering him, by constrast. You would be maliciously defaming him for something he didn't do.
The rules state not to attack other users.
Stop trying to justify it with your own opinions.
I am not justifying it or claiming it was not a personal attack. All I am saying is that it was not a slanderous attack.
mrguy888 wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
He did not tell any lies. He never claimed to be giving anything but his own opinion. Therefore what he said was not false and not slander.
Continuing to say he was slandering you would be slandering him, by constrast. You would be maliciously defaming him for something he didn't do.
The rules state not to attack other users.
Stop trying to justify it with your own opinions.
I am not justifying it or claiming it was not a personal attack. All I am saying is that it was not a slanderous attack.
It's based on an opinion.
Helzeth has yet to post a refutation.
Actually, you know what. I like the idea of you getting banned more than you being reasoned out of your idiotic retardation trip.
I already pmed you the list of all the people who reported you.
..the list is growing ;)
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
He did not tell any lies. He never claimed to be giving anything but his own opinion. Therefore what he said was not false and not slander.
Continuing to say he was slandering you would be slandering him, by constrast. You would be maliciously defaming him for something he didn't do.
The rules state not to attack other users.
Stop trying to justify it with your own opinions.
I am not justifying it or claiming it was not a personal attack. All I am saying is that it was not a slanderous attack.
It's based on an opinion.
Helzeth has yet to post a refutation.
The two things you just said were unrelated to my post. They are also things that I don't care about.
Helzeth wrote:
Actually, you know what. I like the idea of you getting banned more than you being reasoned out of your idiotic retardation trip.
I already pmed you the list of all the people who reported you.
..the list is growing ;)
You are on quite the "idiotic retardation trip" yourself...
Helzeth wrote:
Actually, you know what. I like the idea of you getting banned more than you being reasoned out of your idiotic retardation trip.
I already pmed you the list of all the people who reported you.
..the list is growing ;)
What's with the insults?
I haven't broken a single rule.
mrguy888 wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
He did not tell any lies. He never claimed to be giving anything but his own opinion. Therefore what he said was not false and not slander.
Continuing to say he was slandering you would be slandering him, by constrast. You would be maliciously defaming him for something he didn't do.
The rules state not to attack other users.
Stop trying to justify it with your own opinions.
I am not justifying it or claiming it was not a personal attack. All I am saying is that it was not a slanderous attack.
It's based on an opinion.
Helzeth has yet to post a refutation.
The two things you just said were unrelated to my post. They are also things that I don't care about.
An opinion is slanderous if it is not related to the truth.
Being an expert in chess does not mean that person is intelligent anymore than being a track star makes you a genius.
But it is related to truth. His opinion is based on what you posted.
The second thing you said is true but unrelated. I like mangos.
mrguy888 wrote:
But it is related to truth. His opinion is based on what you posted.
The second thing you said is true but unrelated. I like mangos.
It is related. Don't blame your poor reading comprehension on someone else.
There is no truth in a statement if you just say it.
Calling the sky "red" doesn't make it "red."
Like I said, chess has nothing to do with intelligence.
The best players are child prodigies.
But he did not just say it. He exchanged posts on this forum and during your game which he processed and developed an opinion on.
It is hypocrytical say his opinion is void because you just said that he just said it.
Pears are a great fruit.
mrguy888 wrote:
But he did not just say it. He exchanged posts on this forum and during your game which he processed and developed an opinion on.
It is hypocrytical say his opinion is void because you just said that he just said it.
Pears are a great fruit.
He hasn't given an opinion.
He has been trolling and insulting the whole time.
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
But he did not just say it. He exchanged posts on this forum and during your game which he processed and developed an opinion on.
It is hypocrytical say his opinion is void because you just said that he just said it.
Pears are a great fruit.
He hasn't given an opinion.
He has been trolling and insulting the whole time.
Now you are just contradicting both yourself and reality. I am bored of you if you can't produce new material.
mrguy888 wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
But he did not just say it. He exchanged posts on this forum and during your game which he processed and developed an opinion on.
It is hypocrytical say his opinion is void because you just said that he just said it.
Pears are a great fruit.
He hasn't given an opinion.
He has been trolling and insulting the whole time.
Now you are just contradicting both yourself and reality. I am bored of you if you can't produce new material.
Stop trolling.
If you don't like my posts, get out.
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
But he did not just say it. He exchanged posts on this forum and during your game which he processed and developed an opinion on.
It is hypocrytical say his opinion is void because you just said that he just said it.
Pears are a great fruit.
He hasn't given an opinion.
He has been trolling and insulting the whole time.
Now you are just contradicting both yourself and reality. I am bored of you if you can't produce new material.
Stop trolling.
If you don't like my posts, get out.
Trolling is a team effort, I won't stop if you don't. I give a 90% chance that you don't get what I mean though.
mrguy888 wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
mrguy888 wrote:
But he did not just say it. He exchanged posts on this forum and during your game which he processed and developed an opinion on.
It is hypocrytical say his opinion is void because you just said that he just said it.
Pears are a great fruit.
He hasn't given an opinion.
He has been trolling and insulting the whole time.
Now you are just contradicting both yourself and reality. I am bored of you if you can't produce new material.
Stop trolling.
If you don't like my posts, get out.
Trolling is a team effort, I won't stop if you don't. I give a 90% chance that you don't get what I mean though.
I read your profile, so I'm done feeding you.
You seem to be famous for being a douche around Chess.com.
Because chessgrandmaster2012 and Vlad thinks so? If you post on this site you get a hate note from Vlad. cgm2012 got mad at me because I added him when he tried to create a list of evil people on chess.com.
He did not tell any lies. He never claimed to be giving anything but his own opinion. Therefore what he said was not false and not slander.
Continuing to say he was slandering you would be slandering him, by constrast. You would be maliciously defaming him for something he didn't do.