Re: Mark Goldberg is very bullheaded (Re: Renli is very sad)

On May 9, 1:08 pm, McNaples <mrnap...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Renli wrote:
On May 9, 3:04 am, Mark Goldberg <msgoldb...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Renli wrote:
On May 8, 2:04 pm, Mark Goldberg <msgoldb...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Several reasons; one, the CXW videos Mario posted have nothing at all
to do with what I was saying.
Doesn't matter. The was raised and can be answered more precisely than
your claim it has nothing to do with chen taiji.
I didn't make any such claim in this thread, or likely anywhere. Care
to produce a cite?
"...Several reasons; one, the CXW videos Mario posted have nothing at
all to do with what I was saying."- is what you wrote. But,

But but but... what, Mark? Cat got your tounge?

you posted half arsed videos, and too someone else, they posted such by
someone you have in high regard. It wasn't rocket science, and you
should have merely responded in reference to others inferring poor
martial or fighting capacity.....

But but but.. fill the air with words... nice. You were wrong, admit
it like a man and MOVE ON, MARK...

...it's time to wake up.

In fact this is case in
point Mark. Because CXW is known for putting out more material which
sets the record straight - by several orders of magnitude.
Then why didn't you post that... and bring it to a different discussion
rather than just this quibbling?

Because people raising the issue do not want to be corrected. They
want to obfuscate the issue I raised. If someone like you posted an
honest question I'd answer it. Mike or Mario? Mario (and Mike) have
been the in-joke for quite some time now. Dig around a little. Keep
your eyes open. This isn't rocket science.

Last year you put up those videos, that were not successful, on quite a
few levels. What did you expect here, and why act offended at the
inferences... defend your inferences, and beliefs and make others
believe. Instead, you merely deny the validity of the doubters.

Since you asked. I will tell you again. I posted two videos: a li
jingwu video, entitled "Ownage". The second video was a response to
the first message but was re-titled "Mind-Bending". That was the Huang
video. Now, go back and tell me you didn't make a huge error in
judgement assuming I meant that the Huang video was "Ownage". It
wasn't. Never was. Yet you based fifty posts on that misunderstanding.
And you are still unwilling to admit you made a mistake. Let's discuss
the Li Jingwu video, shall we?

Tell me... do you believe that others have no rights to their doubts??

They do. But when you make such gross errors.. when you attempt to
come to conclusions for which you have no evidence and which are
obviously wrong, you're going to get told. Now.. what you do with that
info is up to you, but coming up on here with argumentum ad hominem...
please... If it wasn't so funny I wouldn't waste my time.

And sometimes I don't. I have this friend, you see... a
psychotherapist... "Tell me more" she says. Quite funny. But you're
smart enough to figure it out, so do it.

I find it amusing that you, as an outsider, agree that what he has to
say is relevant.
An outsider... I like that. I find great comfort in that.

It's true by your own admission. And it illustrates the problem quite
well. You are not disagreeing with me because I am wrong - you are
disagreeing with me because you suspect me, and don't have any
evidence either way. It's called argumentum ad hominem, and it does
not speak to the issue I raised.

But I have no problem with people who ask real questions, or wry
questions, but I do have problems with those who demand belief above and
beyond what is evidenced. For instance- last year, you pulled this in
your thread 'Ownage'.

That was your mistake, Mark. Go back and look how fast Peter shut up
when he realized that aspect of the thread was based on a
misunderstanding. But others who will remain nameless carried blithely
on, unawares... I suppose I am a bad man for continuing to rub their
noses in it, but, how else will they ever learn?

You need to shut up and start listening, mark. You know about as much
as Mario does. That's some honest advice, but you won't take it, and
neither will mario. You'll just talk and act as if you know all about
it. Well, you don't.
Do tell.

You don't train, and you don't hang out with people who do, so you
should stop acting like an expert with a credible opinion. In fact as
it turns out, the majority of people who do, actually train, disagree
with you. Nice work, Mark. You've managed to totally isolate yourself
from the truth while maintaining an air of self-respect. That's part
of what traps you. Give up that pride, and you could learn a lot.

I can be wrong, and less than knowledgeable about many things. That's
why I enjoy discussing. Not to prove my point- all the time- like you,
but to get and absord info. It's not about being right... it's about how
you get there.

Then ask a question if you enjoy discussing things so much, and stop
being such an idiot about Mario. You have a chance, Mark - to
extricate yourself from the mess people like Mario exemplify. So just
do it. Don't worry about me, just worry about yourself.

And I think cxw has skills and they need discussing but you haven't...

We don't need to discuss CXW. Also, stop dropping his name as if he is
the be all and end all.

maybe it's me , but i'm thinking you don't like this much much do you?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ldH40uF_f28&feature=related
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=2QlKVog58WE&feature=related

tell us why Renli, tell why you think, cxw, sucks????

Beause you lied. Thats why I think he sucks - because I don't, and the
only possible reason is you lied.

Is that all you got? :/

-
.

Relevant Pages
Loading