Search

a message board is a rag-tag collection of pretentious douchebags. any type of social reject will be found on an message board. for instance,
1. nerdy crybabies.
2. internet tough-guys.
3. racists.
4. p-ssive-aggressive -ssholes.
5. aggressive -ssholes.
6. tools/try-hards.
7. perverts.
8. misogynists.
9. dorks.
10. basically anyone who the world is a better place without.

any kind of normal person will eventually be driven away by the circle-jerk of a cl-sterf-ck of nerds stroking each others egos.
types of people you will encounter on a message board:
nerd 1: anyone who doesn’t baby me through life is an -sshole.
nerd 2: i agree, the world is full of meanies!
nerd 3: i’m a bad-ss, i’m tougher than you! everyone sucks except me!
nerd 4: i’m 35 years old and i’m still afraid of the dark, can someone hold me?
a place on the internet where dorks can call eachother “pretentious” and “psuedo-intellectual”.
douchebag 1:you’re so pretentious

douchebag 2:that’s just the kind of talk i’d expect from a psuedo-intellectual
a website in which, contrary to the popular beliefs of the newbies, is not a chat room.
also known as a forum, message boards are much slower than the average chat room.
web based forum for posting opinions and argument – mostly of an irrelevant nature
urban 75 is the uk’s premiere message board
a great way to express your opinions, but unlike a chatroom, there are usaully less n00bz, people act more intelligently, and the screen doesn’t get flooded with replies like so many chatrooms do. often called forums.
urbandictionary.com is a message board, just a very slow one.
“arguing on the internet is like running in the special olymoics, enen if you win you’re still r-t-rded!” -some picture

that pretty much sums it up. the most futile activity in the world is trying to argue on the internet, because rather than real life where you actually engage the person, the internet has not advanced so far.

another problem is that anyone can have access to the internet, so even if you post a sincere message, some degenerate little snot is always waiting with a smart alecky comment and a smiley, which according to them const-tutes an actual argument. what’s even worse, there are often a pack of idiots waiting to agree with them.

here’s an example:

quote=”me”and that’s why i believe the bible. /quote

quote=”idiot 1″you believe a book of fairy tales! /quote

quote=”idiot 2″haha! it’s so true! /quote

now, do you think i’m going to make any sort of breakthrough with these posters? no, that is impossible. and don’t even try to back up your point with any evidence. if you post a link, they’ll just say:

quote=”idiot”that source is clearly biased, it can’t be trusted! /quote

of course an unbiased source is impossible, everyone favours one thing or another. another way is to merely cut and paste the info, but then they’ll say:

quote=”idiot”where are your links? you made that up! /quote

you see what i’m getting at. sometimes people will just come up with a really stupid excuse for an argument, then repeat it over and over, or until another idiot comes to back them up.

quote=”me”h-m-s-xuality is wrong, that’s what the bible says. /quote

quote=”idiot 1″maybe your just trying to hide your own h-m-s-xual urges! that’s why your gay-bashing! /quote

quote=”me”i wasn’t gay bashing. i never said i hated gay people, i said it was wrong according to the bible. /quote

quote=”idiot 1″trying to hide the truth with your condemnation! /quote

quote=”idiot 2″haha! it’s so true! /quote

do they have any proof? no. was i truly doing what they were accusing my of? no. all they know is that there argument sounds good to them, so they can and will use it to dismiss any logical response. if you stop arguing, it will be as though they were right, if you continue, they will step up the -ssault and ridicule you so it appears to the audience as if they are right. and face it, idiot like that are never short of sympathizers waiting to respond.

other popular tactics include negative projection, name calling, typing in all capital letters, long questions, faulty information, exclamation marks, spamming, trolling, and any combination of the above. refuse to respond, and they say:

quote=”idiot”so you can’t defend you position! i win! /quote

but if you respond, chances are you’ll get wrapped up in the same tactics they do, and they’ll say:

quote=”idiot”why can’t you respond logically instead of in emotional outbursts? is that a sign of weakness? argument by emotion is a very poor way to respond! /quote
do i really need an example after all that?