#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
Paste this URL into an email or IM: |
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
|
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
|
I am controlling Conservanazi's mind & making him say stupid shit
You definately are
Side Score: 14
|
 |
You are hive queen
Side Score: 8
|
|
3
points
|
1
point
3
points
1
point
I know you don't usually respond to PMs but this time you might want to. Check out what I found. Nice bro. Not sure how I feel about having my content plagiarised though. You're supposed to ask permission first. It's good content though. Deserves to be seen. Side: You definately are
1
point
2
points
No, I'm saying you plagiarised it. How on earth did I do that? I couldn't find much info about the website. What is it? I don't know, I was searching on the internet to try and find your journalism and I came across that. It appears to just be a news/journalism site. Side: You definately are
1
point
You copied it from this site and posted it on another one I'm guessing. I literally typed "british socialist journalist 9/11 inside job" into my search engine and found that. You don't even know my name. How could you be looking for my journalism? By typing keywords into a search engine that might lead me to it. Side: You definately are
1
point
2
points
1
point
1
point
1
point
Then stop being a lying prick and tell me how you found the article, why you messaged me about it, and how you knew I wrote it despite it not having a byline. Dude, I am literally being completely honest with you I have found several other sites with the same article after I put the whole thing in the search engine (which I didn't do the first time). I already told you why I messaged you about it, I was trying to get you to confirm if it was yours. I did this by PM because if in fact it was yours, I knew you probably wouldn't want it revealed to the whole site. But I am under the impression you didn't write it originally because it is on several different sites. Side: You definately are
1
point
I have found several more websites with the same exact article by the way. It's practically all over the internet. Right. And you found all these copies of my article by typing "British socialist journalism 9/11 inside job" into a search engine. Fuck off. Side: You definately are
Right. And you found all these copies of my article by typing "British socialist journalism 9/11 inside job" into a search engine. That was my first search, where I found the initial article. After I told you that I then pasted the whole damn article into a search engine and found the same exact article on several different sites. Side: You definately are
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Could you do me a favour and stop pretending you don't know how it got there? I'm not angry, just so long as nobody else tries to take credit for writing it. I'm not lying to you. I was looking for your work, not posting it on websites just to lie to you and say I found your work. If I did post it myself then I would know that you automatically would know that it's not somewhere that you put it and that someone plagiarised it so it would be pointless to show it to you. Side: You definately are
1
point
I'm not lying to you. Yes you are. There is no possible scenario in which you are not lying to me. I was looking for your work This is impossible without knowing who I am. Don't make me lose the small amount of respect I have accumulated for you over recent days. The only way you could have run any type of search is with the content itself, in which case you prove yourself halfway guilty (i.e. you copied the content). Side: You definately are
Yes you are. There is no possible scenario in which you are not lying to me. I really am telling the truth. What would I have to gain by lying about this? What I was trying to do was find something written by you on the internet, which is why I pmed you the link to confirm if it was yours or not. This is impossible without knowing who I am. Apparently not. Don't make me lose the small amount of respect I have accumulated for you over recent days. Don't make me search for more than just your journalism. The only way you could have run any type of search is with the content itself, in which case you prove yourself halfway guilty (i.e. you copied the content). Apparently not. Side: You definately are
He is a sociopath, he doesn't process honesty or trust. Maybe you're right, because it's clearly illogical for me to plagiarise him (when he in fact probably plagiarised the material in the first place) just to show it off to him like some kind of idiot. The real and obvious reason I showed him is because I wanted to find out if it was his or not because I was looking for his material. Side: You are hive queen
|
