Ontological Disproof of God

[emjay]

Members are so predominantly, radically, paranoid, regaring this "trolling/troll" nonsensical-supersition-barrier-to-communicating-with-newbies, that they fail to see an authentic rustic struggling with the hyper-complexities of, actually, for the very first time ever, in an otherwise totally computer-friendly world,   instructing a computer, via BB code, to address another human being on an Atheist/Agnostic Forum, which address, requires employment of computer code to respond to others on the forum:

It is not unwarranted superstition/paranoia because trolling does happen a lot on this forum, but I do believe that in this case you've most likely been unfairly caught in the crossfire. In other words, I do believe you are sincere, and I do believe you're just trying to get the hang of an unfamiliar computing environment. And I feel like shit for overreacting with you. So, so be it if everyone else thinks I'm being gullible, but I think you're sincere and this is all a big misunderstanding.

And in this latest business, I should not have jumped to conclusions, nor been so black and white... 'absolutist'... about it in any case. So, I apologise; I overreacted and I was a dick.

(which was repeatedly proffered to Negatio in an effort to assist him in attaining-to proper conduct within this forum), was, systematically misleading. Thus, kindly member intention to explicate code, in fact, obfuscated a desired understanding, on the part of the newbie,of  the process of correctly, respectfully, replying to members of the forum----- i.e., putting the single cap around 'author', unintentionally misled a struggling newbie.  Ignorant; confused; unintentionally misled; and, unable to readily comprehend what the structure of the BB code was made to achieve, the newbie became a laughingstock; an assured ''troll'', who was, for certain, surreptitiously trolling members; and, at the same time, the newbie, tendent to overthink things like Texas hold-em, could not penetrate an overwhelming unfamiliarity that is computer code. The forum's Reply/Quote platform is an efficient and effiacious torture chamber for newbies... Negatio.

I accept the blame for that. Your quotes were messed up at the start so we had to address the issue of how to quote properly, but going in the BBCode direction was probably a bad idea, especially for someone who the very idea of tags was a foreign concept. The average user doesn't need to use BBCode directly... or at least not much, and should be able to get along just fine just using the Reply button, but for whatever reason, you were having problems with that from the very start. So since then we've just been going round the houses trying to solve the problems but it's just been making it worse and overwhelming you with jargon and technical information that with no background in this stuff, is not reasonable to expect you to be able to understand overnight. So I'm sorry negatio. Just forget all about BBCode, if you can, and just use the Reply button (but still not the Quote button) and just click your cursor into the blank space below the quote your replying to, and type your reply there. That's all there is, or should be, to it.

As for the forum Reply/Quote forum being torturous for newbies, I have to give you fair warning then that a lot of forums use this same software, so do Replies/Quoting the same way. So if you want to move on to other forums, just be aware of that.

[KevinM1]

BBCode isn't really difficult.  It's just a way to manually mark up text so the forum displays it in a certain way.  When anyone writes a post, it's saved in a database.  When someone requests to read a post (by clicking on a thread title), the software transforms the text between the tags.  The actual syntax is trivial:

Code:

[b]this text will be bold[/b]
[i]this text is italicized[/i]
[quote]this text will appear to be quoted[/quote]
etc.

Tags can be nested, so you can have:

Code:

[b]this text is bold and [i]this text is both bold and italic[/i][/b]
[quote][quote]The first quoted text[/quote] the second quoted text[/quote]
etc.

Why use something like BBCode?  Because there's no real way to save text formatting inside the text data itself.  There are many different character encoding systems, but no internal way to save a string of characters as bold characters, or italic characters, etc.  So, some way to flag them as having different formatting is necessary.

[emjay]

BBCode isn't really difficult.  It's just a way to manually mark up text so the forum displays it in a certain way.  When anyone writes a post, it's saved in a database.  When someone requests to read a post (by clicking on a thread title), the software transforms the text between the tags.  The actual syntax is trivial:

Code:

[b]this text will be bold[/b]
[i]this text is italicized[/i]
[quote]this text will appear to be quoted[/quote]
etc.

Tags can be nested, so you can have:

Code:

[b]this text is bold and [i]this text is both bold and italic[/i][/b]
[quote] the second quoted text[/quote]
etc.

Why use something like BBCode?  Because there's no real way to save text formatting inside the text data itself.  There are many different character encoding systems, but no internal way to save a string of characters as bold characters, or italic characters, etc.  So, some way to flag them as having different formatting is necessary.

I think that's a very good breakdown, but I think the most likely problem here is that negatio is not familiar with the underlying concepts of HTML etc, the stuff on which this is based. So from that perspective, even this simple breakdown, may be too much without those... call them 'axioms' ...in place about the general structure of the web, web pages, and programming concepts. Like I doubt very much that my mum would be able to make head nor tail of that, no matter how simple it is to you or me, because she would not understand the principles on which it rests.

[Whateverist]

Me thinks the troll has left the building.

[Abaddon_ire]

Snip for brevity

Do you not understand that the vast majority of your interlocutors here are already godless heathens? Do you not understand that by that simple fact, your onto-crap is singularly unimpressive? Do you not understand that given the former, your onto-crap holds no water given that you are incompetent to present it in any vaguely readable form?

Sure, While most here are actual atheists, we would happily entertain your arguments if you were to present them in legible form?

No, you do not. All you are doing is arguing with a bunch of atheists for shiggles.

Stop doing that.

[negatio]

 So, I apologise; I overreacted and I was a dick.

Gee wizz, thanks.  So, if possible, can I have your positive back, please ? !  Am I still mistakenly thinking that I have to, every time, in order to properly respond to you right this instant have to write ? Negatio.

---

Snip for brevity

Do you not understand that the vast majority of your interlocutors here are already godless heathens? Do you not understand that by that simple fact, your onto-crap is singularly unimpressive? Do you not understand that given the former, your onto-crap holds no water given that you are incompetent to present it in any vaguely readable form?

Sure, While most here are actual atheists, we would happily entertain your arguments if you were to present them in legible form?

No, you do not. All you are doing is arguing with a bunch of atheists for shiggles.

Stop doing that.

I cannot respond here until I understand what ''shiggles'' are; even the worldwide web does not know...

[Abaddon_ire]

 So, I apologise; I overreacted and I was a dick.

Gee wizz, thanks.  So, if possible, can I have your positive back, please ? !  Am I still mistakenly thinking that I have to, every time, in order to properly respond to you right this instant have to write   ? Negatio.

If you don't write, how can you respond to anything that anyone posts? 

Yet another malformed query that provokes me to wonder about your motives here.
And knock it off with the space between sentence and punctuation. Putting two in there just makes you appear to be a moron. Just stop.

Think you can manage that                                                     ?

Sometime this century                                               ?

[negatio]

If you don't write, how can you respond to anything that anyone posts? 

Yet another malformed query that provokes me to wonder about your motives here.
And knock it off with the space between sentence and punctuation. Putting two in there just makes you appear to be a moron. Just stop.

Think you can manage that                                                     ?

Sometime this century                                               ?

Yes, I will stop placing a space before the question mark, if that drives you so loopy...Will you tell me what ''shiggles'' are, or, is that just another malformed query?!
I do not give a flying goddamn fuck what you wonder about my motives here; however, I will reflect on the question, and, then, I may write answers out for you; first I have to think it out.

---

[quote pid='1810270' dateline='1536111259']

Kevin, thank you so very much for such a perfectly presented and substantial free lesson in code!  It is clear that writing such an extensive explanation for me was a lot, a lot, of work.  I am seeing how beautiful the language and the functionality of code is, I will keep and study your manual.
So, then, it is only when using the Quote tab/function that one employs BB code...and, I now, finally, clearly see that code is not necessary in Reply! Negatio.





[/quote]

[negatio]

Weird enough when you refer to yourself in the 3rd person.  When you address yourself I just glaze over.

You seem more motivated to protect your argument behind layers of protective language than to risk having it criticized directly.  

You bore me.

Here is my guess as to what is now happening to me via all the constant absolutely unfounded accusations of being a troll:
I think that my referring to Negatio, which is a pseudonym, and, therefore, not actually in fact the full self of the person who had to adopt a pseudonym in order to participate in the forum, is an initial symptom of becoming schizophrenic.
So, when I so distantly refer to Negatio I am, in some instances, splitting-off literally before your eyes, by referring to my forum persona.
The forum persona, Negatio, who is actually Duane, is, possibly undergoing, via all the constant horrid unfounded accusation of being a troll, of trolling, that which constitutes the kind of pressure upon a human consciousness which generates schizophrenia.  One theory of schizophrenia is known as the "schizophrenogenic double-bind''.
Duane, the real consciousness behind Negatio, now sees Negatio from a distance, Duane is not, in fact, Negatio, or, in a certain sense, Duane both is, and, is not Negatio; thus, there is the distance which accounts for the use of the third person.
Duane is literally, up to the extent that he is undergoing the kind of unhealthy schizophrenogenic pressure from others, splitting, somewhat, off, i.e., splitting-off into a slight schizo-state within the forum; so, now, all  of you who have subjected me to the hell of constant accusation of being this horrid creature you call a "troll'', have, thereby, within the forum, unintentionally created a somewhat schizophrenic Duane who refers to Negatio.  Make sense ?  Duane/Negatio.

[Abaddon_ire]

Yes, I will stop placing a space before the question mark, if that drives you so loopy...Will you tell me what ''shiggles'' are, or, is that just another malformed query?!

It is a contraction of a commonplace term used extensively in common speech.

However, since you are clearly too lazy to google it, allow me.