New details of Newtown shooting prove assault weapons ban is needed

[krispos42]

614. On March 15th, I did not mention the Feinstein discussion was repetitive

Although, if it was with you, then it obviously was.

I did mention the second, repetitive subthread in the first, Feinstein, subthread.

Thanks for clearing my name and proving yourself wrong.


Now, onto this part.

So from the beginning he KNEW (a) who he was posting "Ibid" too in that Meta thread,
No, I never said that. I said I reserved my "ibids" for repetitive posters. That was not a knock at you.

and (b) that I was 100% factually correct in my assessment: he did, indeed, post "Ibid" over and over and over again to me, knowing who he was posting to, in that Meta thread.
Yeah, no, because you gave no context to the discussion, nor did you mention I was posting "ibids" to link back to a reply I made to a repetitive post that was made. Nor did you mention that the "other person" began repeating first. Nor did you mention that the "other person" began repeating to avoid admitting wrongness. And, finally, you also failed to mention that the "other person" in the ibid thread was, in fact, YOU.

And yet in #379 (above) and #381 and #388 and #405 and any number of others posted this evening (about every one from him to me, 3/24/13) he has falsely attempted to assert he had NO IDEA who he was posting "Ibid" to in that now-lost Meta thread.

Truthfully and consistently asserted, you mean.

And now his OWN words and post from the very second time he initiated a post to me in this sub-thread puts paid to yet another false assertion of his here.
Second time? That's post #95, which looks like this:

[div class=excerpt style=background:#AFEEEE]Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #92)

Fri Mar 15, 2013, 06:07 PM

Star Member krispos42 (44,665 posts)
95. Would semiautomatic rifles fed from detachable magazines still be sold under the new AWB?

View profile
You said no, I said yes, and posted the excerpt to prove it.

I can't prove I went on vacation, and you can't prove I didn't. So that's not going anywhere. The fact that I don't have a history of lying about such things would count for a normal person, but hey...

And let's not forget, my "ibid" replies were in response to copy-and-paste repetition of the same sentence.

But, facts and such don't really seem to work on you.

Ah, okay. I refer to our conversation about the Feinstein ban, and I mention that my "ibids" (which, according to you, I've denied) were in response to a copy-and-paste repetition, which I had been dealing with in another subthread.

And then later on you revealed that YOU were the repetitive poster I referenced. So it turns out I was having at least two conversations with you along separate lines in the thread.




So, as I've been saying all along... what have you proven besides I was having two conversations in a Meta thread?