Has Adam Back Been Compromised?
Thread
Login to reply
Replies ()
Betteridge's Law of Headlines states that any headline ending in a question mark can be answered with "no." This suggests that if a publisher were confident in a positive answer, they would have stated it as a fact rather than posing it as a question.
Strange how you're dropping random wikipedia insights instead of trying to refute anything Kratter says here. This suggests that if you were confident in a real response, you would've stated that rather than meaninglessly adding noise.
Nah, because I understand Brandolini's law: the amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it.
I get you’re frustrated and tired of this topic but so is everyone else. Yelling “That’s BS!” to your opponents makes it that much harder for others to discern the truth. You’re selfishly muddying the waters.
Anyone foolish enough to take Kratter seriously is already screwed. I'm just here for the lulz now.
the fact he won’t respond and thinks ‘lulz’ are appropriate for such an important issue tells you everything you need to know.
Id rather use the word "intentionally," rather than "selfishly" 😉
Anyone foolish enough to take you seriously clearly knows nothing about you and has not seen any of your interactions
Indeed, the entire issue is a joke.