Re: Your Starting 5

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 15:28

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

I completed the task. I gave my team of 5 dudes from that list totalling $15. I merely mentioned that IF I could get Draymond for $1, I would take that HYPOTHETICAL option. Even someone as stupid as you should be able to sort all of this out on the first try. It's pathetic that you can't manage it.

I have reviewed all of your posts in this thread and I have determined that you are a fucking charlatan.

1st: steve picks his team
2nd: steve comments about gHost living in Phoenix
3rd: steve demonstrates his blue-ness by criticizing my desire to add Draymond to my team
4th: steve claims Karl Malone isn't over priced
5th: the post I'm currently responding to

So no, you didn't pick who was the most over priced player on that list. You are embarrassing yourself, steve. I would tell you to try harder, but I honestly think this is the best posting you are capable of. It's sad, really...

Where does it say I have to pick someone that is overpriced on the original post? That's not what the game is so I'm leaving that part blank. You volunteered that info and all I did was express my disagreement and then you launched into your usual hateful rebuttal. To use your new favorite word 'IF', IF they required that I put down the most overpriced player then I would have done it.

Jesus Christ, steve, do I have to get this damn remedial with you? You're trying my patience now.

I posed the question "who is most overpriced on that list?" I then nominated Wade and Malone, giving the nod to Malone. You responded to that post by giving some Malone stats and concluding that he's not that overpriced. In my response to your response, I noted that you had not given your own pick for most overpriced when criticizing my choice (in context, that you did not "nominate a candidate of your own"). It was never my contention that you had failed to choose a team as per the OP.

Are you following the conversation yet, or do I need to explain what words mean first?

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 15:33

Senior Dickfist wrote:I showed this scenario to my brother, we'll call him Junior Dickfist, who also happens to know nothing about basketball and he replied that he would pick the 5 $1 players and bet the remaining $10 on the opposing team.

Now, Cameron and Steve, please resume the fight!

Please inform Junior that he is misguided. The premise in the OP posits no "opposing team" on which to bet.

by **WhiteBoyHatcher** 2018-01-10, 15:37

Regardless, I like the way Junior Dickfist thinks.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 15:40

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:Regardless, I like the way Junior Dickfist thinks.

It was definitely outside the box thinking, but if the opposing team is tSwill All Stars (led by OT "better than Tum Tum" PT), I'd rather have money on the 5 (future) Hall of Famers.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 15:46

Cameron wrote:
Senior Dickfist wrote:I showed this scenario to my brother, we'll call him Junior Dickfist, who also happens to know nothing about basketball and he replied that he would pick the 5 $1 players and bet the remaining $10 on the opposing team.

Now, Cameron and Steve, please resume the fight!

Please inform Junior that he is misguided. The premise in the OP posits no "opposing team" on which to bet.

And it also doesn't say you can just buy Draymond Green at whatever price point you set. lol!

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 15:49

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

Please inform Junior that he is misguided. The premise in the OP posits no "opposing team" on which to bet.

And it also doesn't say you can just buy Draymond Green at whatever price point you set.

Now that steve has been shown to be wrong and stupid, he completely disregards the evidence he has been presented and returns to belaboring a point that he misunderstood in the first place.

Well done, steve, you've just one-upped your own idiocy.

by **Other Teams Pursuing That** 2018-01-10, 15:51

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:Regardless, I like the way Junior Dickfist thinks.

Genius.

by Senior Dickfist 2018-01-10, 15:57

Cameron wrote:
Senior Dickfist wrote:I showed this scenario to my brother, we'll call him Junior Dickfist, who also happens to know nothing about basketball and he replied that he would pick the 5 $1 players and bet the remaining $10 on the opposing team.

Now, Cameron and Steve, please resume the fight!

Please inform Junior that he is misguided. The premise in the OP posits no "opposing team" on which to bet.

Oh, Junior is misguided, but this is the least of his problems.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 16:08

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

And it also doesn't say you can just buy Draymond Green at whatever price point you set.

Now that steve has been shown to be wrong and stupid, he completely disregards the evidence he has been presented and returns to belaboring a point that he misunderstood in the first place.

Well done, steve, you've just one-upped your own idiocy.

Man you are so worked up! I put the 'lol' icon to signify that it was a joke but of course that was lost on you.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 16:34

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

Now that steve has been shown to be wrong and stupid, he completely disregards the evidence he has been presented and returns to belaboring a point that he misunderstood in the first place.

Well done, steve, you've just one-upped your own idiocy.

Man you are so worked up! I put the 'lol' icon to signify that it was a joke but of course that was lost on you.

Now steve is turning to the "u mad" defense. In response to a post that contains no profanity, no all caps words, and no exclamation points.

You're bad at this, steve.

by **Rocinante** 2018-01-10, 16:58

Cameron gets like this when he's not drunk, steve. Don't take it personally. He's really not like this.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 17:05

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

Where does it say I have to pick someone that is overpriced on the original post? That's not what the game is so I'm leaving that part blank. You volunteered that info and all I did was express my disagreement and then you launched into your usual hateful rebuttal. To use your new favorite word 'IF', IF they required that I put down the most overpriced player then I would have done it.

Jesus Christ, steve, do I have to get this damn remedial with you? You're trying my patience now.

I posed the question "who is most overpriced on that list?" I then nominated Wade and Malone, giving the nod to Malone. You responded to that post by giving some Malone stats and concluding that he's not that overpriced. In my response to your response, I noted that you had not given your own pick for most overpriced when criticizing my choice (in context, that you did not "nominate a candidate of your own"). It was never my contention that you had failed to choose a team as per the OP.

Are you following the conversation yet, or do I need to explain what words mean first?

I'm in agreement with the price of the players in the OP's topic, but I disagree with you saying Malone is not worth $4.00.

Maybe at the end of this season I'd move Durant up to $4.00 and drop Larry Bird to $3.00 but as of now I'm content with the price of the players. Okay?

by Guest 2018-01-10, 17:13

Moving Bird to the $3 line has me thinking Cameron may have a point.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 17:17

LooseGoose wrote:Moving Bird to the $3 line has me thinking Cameron may have a point.

You don't think at some point Durant surpasses Bird?

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 17:17

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

Jesus Christ, steve, do I have to get this damn remedial with you? You're trying my patience now.

I posed the question "who is most overpriced on that list?" I then nominated Wade and Malone, giving the nod to Malone. You responded to that post by giving some Malone stats and concluding that he's not that overpriced. In my response to your response, I noted that you had not given your own pick for most overpriced when criticizing my choice (in context, that you did not "nominate a candidate of your own"). It was never my contention that you had failed to choose a team as per the OP.

Are you following the conversation yet, or do I need to explain what words mean first?

I'm in agreement with the price of the players in the OP's topic, but I disagree with you saying Malone is not worth $4.00.

Maybe at the end of this season I'd move Durant up to $4.00 and drop Larry Bird to $3.00 but as of now I'm content with the price of the players. Okay?

So, by deductive logic, your answer to the question "which of these players is most overpriced?" is "none, they are all priced equally perfectly." Implicit in your answer is the notion that each player on the chart is exactly equal in value to each of the other 4 players on the same price line.

That is stupid.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 17:19

LooseGoose wrote:Moving Bird to the $3 line has me thinking Cameron may have a point.

If I beat the drum long enough, eventually I won't be the only one marching.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 17:34

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

I'm in agreement with the price of the players in the OP's topic, but I disagree with you saying Malone is not worth $4.00.

Maybe at the end of this season I'd move Durant up to $4.00 and drop Larry Bird to $3.00 but as of now I'm content with the price of the players. Okay?

So, by deductive logic, your answer to the question "which of these players is most overpriced?" is "none, they are all priced equally perfectly." Implicit in your answer is the notion that each player on the chart is exactly equal in value to each of the other 4 players on the same price line.

That is stupid.

Sounds like your real issue is with the game in the OP's topic and not my opinion.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 17:40

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

So, by deductive logic, your answer to the question "which of these players is most overpriced?" is "none, they are all priced equally perfectly." Implicit in your answer is the notion that each player on the chart is exactly equal in value to each of the other 4 players on the same price line.

That is stupid.

Sounds like your real issue is with the game in the OP's topic and not my opinion.

Picking a $15 lineup using the given players and prices is fine. The point of the game is to choose the best "values" on the table to construct the strongest lineup. Your assertion is that they are all valued equally correctly. If your opinion were unobjectionable, there would simply be no point to the game, as any lineup that costs $15 would be exactly equal to any other lineup that costs $15. I'm not surprised that you can't grasp the logic at play here, though.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 18:10

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

Sounds like your real issue is with the game in the OP's topic and not my opinion.

Picking a $15 lineup using the given players and prices is fine. The point of the game is to choose the best "values" on the table to construct the strongest lineup. Your assertion is that they are all valued equally correctly. If your opinion were unobjectionable, there would simply be no point to the game, as any lineup that costs $15 would be exactly equal to any other lineup that costs $15. I'm not surprised that you can't grasp the logic at play here, though.

The point of the pricing is to take the positions G, SG, SF, F, C and rank them one through five and you have to construct a team based on their price.

The greatest PG, SG, SF, F and C = $5.00, then you go down to the next line the second best option is $4.00 (Malone is the second best PF on the list so he's worth $4.00), etc. Based on this I don't have a problem with the way the players are priced in the game.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 18:33

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

Picking a $15 lineup using the given players and prices is fine. The point of the game is to choose the best "values" on the table to construct the strongest lineup. Your assertion is that they are all valued equally correctly. If your opinion were unobjectionable, there would simply be no point to the game, as any lineup that costs $15 would be exactly equal to any other lineup that costs $15. I'm not surprised that you can't grasp the logic at play here, though.

The point of the pricing is to take the positions G, SG, SF, F, C and rank them one through five and you have to construct a team based on their price.

The greatest PG, SG, SF, F and C = $5.00, then you go down to the next line the second best option is $4.00 (Malone is the second best PF on the list so he's worth $4.00), etc. Based on this I don't have a problem with the way the players are priced in the game.

Not having a problem with a guy being on a given price line is immaterial. I don't have a problem with Kareem being on the $5 line, but I'd much prefer to spend that $5 on MJ or LeBron. Ergo, Kareem is more overpriced than either MJ or LeBron. I simply asked who was most overpriced and gave my input. You then responded to me in disagreement. You brought this on yourself, steve. It didn't have to go this way.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 18:42

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

The point of the pricing is to take the positions G, SG, SF, F, C and rank them one through five and you have to construct a team based on their price.

The greatest PG, SG, SF, F and C = $5.00, then you go down to the next line the second best option is $4.00 (Malone is the second best PF on the list so he's worth $4.00), etc. Based on this I don't have a problem with the way the players are priced in the game.

Not having a problem with a guy being on a given price line is immaterial. I don't have a problem with Kareem being on the $5 line, but I'd much prefer to spend that $5 on MJ or LeBron. Ergo, Kareem is more overpriced than either MJ or LeBron. I simply asked who was most overpriced and gave my input. You then responded to me in disagreement. You brought this on yourself, steve. It didn't have to go this way.

All you have done is argued for your preference but
Malone should be $4.00 and therefore is not overpriced as you claim he is and that’s my final answer. Have a good night.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 19:17

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

Not having a problem with a guy being on a given price line is immaterial. I don't have a problem with Kareem being on the $5 line, but I'd much prefer to spend that $5 on MJ or LeBron. Ergo, Kareem is more overpriced than either MJ or LeBron. I simply asked who was most overpriced and gave my input. You then responded to me in disagreement. You brought this on yourself, steve. It didn't have to go this way.

All you have done is argued for your preference but
Malone should be $4.00 and therefore is not overpriced as you claim he is and that’s my final answer. Have a good night.

If Karl Malone is so fucking great, why didn't you pick him for your team, steve? Was it because you felt that $4 was better spent on Shaq? Then Malone is more overpriced than Shaq. Or was it because you felt that $2 for Dirk was a better value than $4 for Malone? Then Malone is more overpriced than Dirk.

You've painted yourself into a corner, you dumb twat. Just admit that I'm right and apologize for wasting everyone's time, then we can move on.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 19:33

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

All you have done is argued for your preference but
Malone should be $4.00 and therefore is not overpriced as you claim he is and that’s my final answer. Have a good night.

If Karl Malone is so fucking great, why didn't you pick him for your team, steve? Was it because you felt that $4 was better spent on Shaq? Then Malone is more overpriced than Shaq. Or was it because you felt that $2 for Dirk was a better value than $4 for Malone? Then Malone is more overpriced than Dirk.

You've painted yourself into a corner, you dumb twat. Just admit that I'm right and apologize for wasting everyone's time, then we can move on.

You are making assumptions about my selection process that are inaccurate. I could swap Malone for Shaq and dirk for Hakeem and I’d be just as happy with my team.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 19:39

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

If Karl Malone is so fucking great, why didn't you pick him for your team, steve? Was it because you felt that $4 was better spent on Shaq? Then Malone is more overpriced than Shaq. Or was it because you felt that $2 for Dirk was a better value than $4 for Malone? Then Malone is more overpriced than Dirk.

You've painted yourself into a corner, you dumb twat. Just admit that I'm right and apologize for wasting everyone's time, then we can move on.

You are making assumptions about my selection process that are inaccurate. I could swap Malone for Shaq and dirk for Hakeem and I’d be just as happy with my team.

You are so stupid, steve. Your existence is a waste of time and resources.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 19:45

I'm repeating myself now, but as I said earlier:

"Your assertion is that they are all valued equally correctly. If your opinion were unobjectionable, there would simply be no point to the game, as any lineup that costs $15 would be exactly equal to any other lineup that costs $15"

To no one's great surprise, steve doesn't grasp the point of the entire premise of this thread. Evidently, he thinks the purpose is to figure out a combination that adds up to $15. Given his minimal brain capacity, I'm actually kind of proud of him for picking five guys and having the numbers add up correctly.

Way to go, steve!

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 19:58

Cameron wrote:I'm repeating myself now, but as I said earlier:

"Your assertion is that they are all valued equally correctly. If your opinion were unobjectionable, there would simply be no point to the game, as any lineup that costs $15 would be exactly equal to any other lineup that costs $15"

To no one's great surprise, steve doesn't grasp the point of the entire premise of this thread. Evidently, he thinks the purpose is to figure out a combination that adds up to $15. Given his minimal brain capacity, I'm actually kind of proud of him for picking five guys and having the numbers add up correctly.

Way to go, steve!

Why are you putting your own words in quotes and then attributing then to me? You are making inaccurate assumptions about my selection
Process.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 20:03

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:I'm repeating myself now, but as I said earlier:

"Your assertion is that they are all valued equally correctly. If your opinion were unobjectionable, there would simply be no point to the game, as any lineup that costs $15 would be exactly equal to any other lineup that costs $15"

To no one's great surprise, steve doesn't grasp the point of the entire premise of this thread. Evidently, he thinks the purpose is to figure out a combination that adds up to $15. Given his minimal brain capacity, I'm actually kind of proud of him for picking five guys and having the numbers add up correctly.

Way to go, steve!

Why are you putting your own words in quotes and then attributing then to me? You are making inaccurate assumptions about my selection
Process.

Your inability to follow a simple conversation never ceases to amaze. I said that I was repeating myself, then I proceeded to quote myself. I did not attribute it to you. I would never demean my own words by asserting that they could have come from you.

I selected that quote because after I said it, you went on to validate it by confirming that you would have been just as happy switching 40% of your lineup for different guys of equal price.

You will never understand, and I'm getting tired of trying to dumb it down enough for you to comprehend (a fool's errand if ever there was one). I'm about 2 drinks away from just reverting to insulting you with generic memes.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 20:08

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

Why are you putting your own words in quotes and then attributing then to me? You are making inaccurate assumptions about my selection
Process.

Your inability to follow a simple conversation never ceases to amaze. I said that I was repeating myself, then I proceeded to quote myself. I did not attribute it to you. I would never demean my own words by asserting that they could have come from you.

I selected that quote because after I said it, you went on to validate it by confirming that you would have been just as happy switching 40% of your lineup for different guys of equal price.

You will never understand, and I'm getting tired of trying to dumb it down enough for you to comprehend (a fool's errand if ever there was one). I'm about 2 drinks away from just reverting to insulting you with generic memes.

Sorry, I’m eating dinner and didn’t read your post well. Please forgive me.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 20:12

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

Your inability to follow a simple conversation never ceases to amaze. I said that I was repeating myself, then I proceeded to quote myself. I did not attribute it to you. I would never demean my own words by asserting that they could have come from you.

I selected that quote because after I said it, you went on to validate it by confirming that you would have been just as happy switching 40% of your lineup for different guys of equal price.

You will never understand, and I'm getting tired of trying to dumb it down enough for you to comprehend (a fool's errand if ever there was one). I'm about 2 drinks away from just reverting to insulting you with generic memes.

Sorry, I’m eating dinner and didn’t read your post well. Please forgive me.

by **WhiteBoyHatcher** 2018-01-10, 20:15

Quick someone pour Cam another drink

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 20:17

Cameron wrote:I'm repeating myself now, but as I said earlier:

"Your assertion is that they are all valued equally correctly. If your opinion were unobjectionable, there would simply be no point to the game, as any lineup that costs $15 would be exactly equal to any other lineup that costs $15"

To no one's great surprise, steve doesn't grasp the point of the entire premise of this thread. Evidently, he thinks the purpose is to figure out a combination that adds up to $15. Given his minimal brain capacity, I'm actually kind of proud of him for picking five guys and having the numbers add up correctly.

Way to go, steve!

The original point is Karl Malone should be $4.

And yes, I’d take either combo of Hakeem/Malone or Shaq/Nowitski but this doesn’t prove your point. I think they are both strong combos and I can’t say one is better than the other and neither can you.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 20:17

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:Quick someone pour Cam another drink

I’m about to get one. Bourbon it is.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 20:23

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:I'm repeating myself now, but as I said earlier:

"Your assertion is that they are all valued equally correctly. If your opinion were unobjectionable, there would simply be no point to the game, as any lineup that costs $15 would be exactly equal to any other lineup that costs $15"

To no one's great surprise, steve doesn't grasp the point of the entire premise of this thread. Evidently, he thinks the purpose is to figure out a combination that adds up to $15. Given his minimal brain capacity, I'm actually kind of proud of him for picking five guys and having the numbers add up correctly.

Way to go, steve!

The original point is Karl Malone should be $4.

And yes, I’d take either combo of Hakeem/Malone or Shaq/Nowitski but this doesn’t prove your point. I think they are both strong combos and I can’t say one is better than the other and neither can you.

I certainly can. I'd take Shaq and Dirk all day over Hakeem and Malone. And it's definitely NOT because I think Hakeem is overpriced...

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 20:36

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

The original point is Karl Malone should be $4.

And yes, I’d take either combo of Hakeem/Malone or Shaq/Nowitski but this doesn’t prove your point. I think they are both strong combos and I can’t say one is better than the other and neither can you.

I certainly can. I'd take Shaq and Dirk all day over Hakeem and Malone. And it's definitely NOT because I think Hakeem is overpriced...

Hakeem outscored Shaq every game in the 95 finals and Malone is much better forward than Nowitski.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 21:03

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

I certainly can. I'd take Shaq and Dirk all day over Hakeem and Malone. And it's definitely NOT because I think Hakeem is overpriced...

Hakeem outscored Shaq every game in the 95 finals and Malone is much better forward than Nowitski.

In 1995, Hakeem was 32 and Shaq was 23, not to mention that judging the two players by scoring from a single series is absurdly reductive.

Malone is better, but I think it's disrespectful to Dirk to say much better.

Shaq + Dirk PER = 49.1
Hakeem + Malone PER = 47.5

I don't consider PER to be an argument ender by any means, but I don't care to get bogged down in arguing the merits of these two pairs of players. I didn't choose any of them for my team.

At this point, I don't even really care about proving that Karl Malone is overpriced. I just want to establish that not all 25 dudes in question are valued equally correctly. It should go without saying, but steve is like the idiot who puts his fucking hand in the mower while the blade is spinning and now there has to be a warning label on every fucking lawn mower.

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 21:30

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

Hakeem outscored Shaq every game in the 95 finals and Malone is much better forward than Nowitski.

In 1995, Hakeem was 32 and Shaq was 23, not to mention that judging the two players by scoring from a single series is absurdly reductive.

Malone is better, but I think it's disrespectful to Dirk to say much better.

Shaq + Dirk PER = 49.1
Hakeem + Malone PER = 47.5

I don't consider PER to be an argument ender by any means, but I don't care to get bogged down in arguing the merits of these two pairs of players. I didn't choose any of them for my team.

At this point, I don't even really care about proving that Karl Malone is overpriced. I just want to establish that not all 25 dudes in question are valued equally correctly. It should go without saying, but steve is like the idiot who puts his fucking hand in the mower while the blade is spinning and now there has to be a warning label on every fucking lawn mower.

PER is a terrible stat for looking at defense and Malone was a much better defender than Nowitski.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 21:49

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

In 1995, Hakeem was 32 and Shaq was 23, not to mention that judging the two players by scoring from a single series is absurdly reductive.

Malone is better, but I think it's disrespectful to Dirk to say much better.

Shaq + Dirk PER = 49.1
Hakeem + Malone PER = 47.5

I don't consider PER to be an argument ender by any means, but I don't care to get bogged down in arguing the merits of these two pairs of players. I didn't choose any of them for my team.

At this point, I don't even really care about proving that Karl Malone is overpriced. I just want to establish that not all 25 dudes in question are valued equally correctly. It should go without saying, but steve is like the idiot who puts his fucking hand in the mower while the blade is spinning and now there has to be a warning label on every fucking lawn mower.

PER is a terrible stat for looking at defense and Malone was a much better defender than Nowitski.

Okay, steve, now tell me again how many more points Hakeem scored than Shaq in that one series...

by **steveschneider** 2018-01-10, 22:01

Cameron wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

PER is a terrible stat for looking at defense and Malone was a much better defender than Nowitski.

Okay, steve, now tell me again how many more points Hakeem scored than Shaq in that one series...

Hakeem was a better shot blocker than Shaq. So whatever drop off in scoring from the Shaq Nowitzki combo I think I’d make it up with improved defense. Like I said I’d be happy with either combo.

by **Cameron** 2018-01-10, 22:07

steveschneider wrote:
Cameron wrote:

Okay, steve, now tell me again how many more points Hakeem scored than Shaq in that one series...

Hakeem was a better shot blocker than Shaq. So whatever drop off in scoring from the Shaq Nowitzki combo I think I’d make it up with improved defense. Like I said I’d be happy with either combo.

Which, like I said, proves my point that you're an idiot who doesn't get the premise of the OP.

by **WhiteBoyHatcher** 2018-01-10, 22:11

I need to do an ip check. I'm becoming more and more convinced that Cameron/steve is bi-polar and created the other account to be a sock puppet and is just arguing with himself.

by Sponsored content