Monster Ball paint.

The Reaper wrote: Mack. Why even post? You don't buy paint at wal-mart. And you obviously by your post don't know about monster ball? I guess proving your internet tough guy is all that matters. Bolded because it will become important later in an extremely ironic way. And by your response I see you have lots of free time... Why don't you "try" some monster paint and get back to us Master? I run a private field and have seen the issues that come from this paint. You can discredit that all you wish, but the fact is still the same, I know about monsterball paint, you don't... Bolded because it will become obvious shortly just how badly The Reaper has been discredited although I had nothing to do with it other than point it out to those who missed it the same way I initially did. move on grumpy. At the point you typed this I wasn’t grumpy.  I’ve gone back and forth with quite a few people on this forum and it has all been in the spirit of friendly arguing.  Some people, such as Snake, DeTrevni or YWSM have changed my mind on certain issues while I have likewise influenced the outlook/opinions of others on different issues.  Some people have been mildly annoying but the interaction with them was still an enjoyable distraction for me and I hope they feel the same way about it from their end. But . . . The Reaper merits special recognition.  He has become the first person on this forum to truly piss me off.  Not because of the discussion exactly, but because of the way he chose to conduct himself during it . . . and the conduct I’m referring to has nothing to do with his insistence that he is correct “just because" or the lack of a coherent, logical and/or supported argument.

With that out of the way, let’s get down to business.  Below is an excerpt from an earlier posts:
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

The Reaper wrote: As a grown up man, I don't need to "prove" my toughness.

Apparently, he actually felt that he did need to prove his toughness though so he followed up a few posts later with this:

The Reaper wrote:

We have a Congressional Medal of Honor recepient on the forum.  (FYI: That is what the medal on the right is.)  Below is a pic for comparison and here is a link to the site I got it from.


<!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]-->
In fact, it appears The Reaper is among the toughest of the tough, because he has apparently earned this medal twice.  (The medal on the left seems to be the Army version from 1896.)  Again, here is a link and the pic is below.

<!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]-->

I compared the first name and initial from his member profile to the information that popped up when I checked the properties of the medal image.  Since the names matched, I assumed it was his real name and searched for Medal of Honor recipients of the same name on three separate CMOH related websites . . . oddly enough I found no matches.

Furthermore, according to wiki, since 1973 the Medal of Honor has only been awarded ". . . seven times, all of them posthumously."  Since The Reaper is posting in this thread, I doubt he is one of the more recent recipients. Furthermore, the early 70's birth date listed in the profile makes it very unlikely he earned one of the earlier ones as they were awarded for actions in Vietnam ending in 1973.  (Of course, he might have been one really tough toddler.)

Given all of the above, I must say that he has done much more damage to his credibility than I could ever have done even on my best day.

Everyone on the forum who knows me knows that while I may tease and taunt I normally refrain from name-calling/flaming.  Just for The Reaper, in this instance, I will make an exception:

You sir, aren't a tool, or even a toolbag or toolbox, you are the whole darn Sears store.

Two notes:

• I saved a copy of the medal pic so I can relink it once it disappears.
• I refrained from including The Reaper's name in this post because it is only available to forum members.

Fact:  You said that MB was extremely dangerous and would kill someone.  I disagree and offered logical reasons based on your own points (and in some cases your own evidence) that opposed your supposition.  Yes, I am trying to "disprove" your point.  I am doing so because I think you are wrong.  It is a very similar process to how you are attempting (ineffectually) to "disprove" my opinion with this very post.  I see no problem with that and really do not understand how it is germane to the discussion.

Actually, this whole statement is wrong, but don't let that get in the way of your "logic"... I didn't say it WOULD kill someone, I stated a for-instance, go back and read, instead of making an ASSumption of yourself. Your previous statments are proof that you find no danger in monsterballs...

I decided to prove that you don't actually listen or read, you just make up your mind and attack and attack and attack.

Fact. You enjoy trying to make other people look bad. (which shows how insecure you actually are...)

Negative.  I do not think I have made you look bad; if you look bad you have done it on your own with your lack of logical and coherent refutation.

actually what looks bad is the way you and a few other guys on this board like to gang up on people with different opinions.

Typical of forums, the goal to "win" and "own" someone... All to make you feel superior in some sad, little, insecure way...

Fact. You like to pretend you are a "excellent" debator. When in fact you just like to see your words on the screen and pat yourself on the back. You are great at debating what you "think" the argument is about, but you don't get the facts first...

TRANSLATION: <Since I still do not really have any type of facts or logic to support my position and have already used up my one good generic statement of disagreement, I will try to disguise my lack of successful refutation by returning to personal attacks.>

I placed a minefield in front of you and you jumped right in... Typical of an arrogant blowhard.