The Battle of Britain

Re:   Epilogue


After declaring victory in the Conclusion, he decided he needed to declare victory again for some reason.  That makes no sense to me, but then one could ponder the psychology of Ossus all day. But, of course, trying to understand Ossus's nightmare version of reality probably isn't a healthy effort for normal people to engage in. 

While this rebuttal is intended to be definitive, it is also by no means complete. It was never meant to be complete. 

In a certain way, that's almost disappointing.  The procedure of ripping the SD.Net flunkies' site attack to shreds has been a chore to say the least . . . noting the varieties of stupidity they employed became almost mechanical.  But still, by offerring up this "rebuttal", they've inadvertently given me a wealth of idiot-proofing material, and in some cases all-new material, with which to expand and improve the site. 

I feel that it has accomplished its goal of crippling Anderson's credibility

Honesty at last from the deceptive Ossus . . . note the goal of a credibility attack.  Ossus, Wong, and the other SD.Net flunkies who participated weren't interested in the facts.  Their goal was to win the debate in any way possible.

How did they do?  I'll just use one of their entertaining quotes:

"We have failed. People flock to DarkStar, believing he is right."  
            -SD.Net Warsie denizen GAT

, and only by altering his tactics and his evidence will he be able to regain respect from anyone on the internet.

Ossus, like most Warsies, fails to recognize that this isn't a popularity contest.  Respect is to be based on how rigidly one conforms to the facts, evidence, and logic.   If Ossus's vacuous, fact-evading attempt to attack my credibility resulted in lost respect toward me, then the problem is not mine.

Mr. Anderson will undoubtedly come up with a response to this attack on his credibility. 

Gee, whatever gave him that idea?  There's nothing like an attack on my credibility filled with falsehoods to get me riled up.

It will probably appear on the surface to defeat a great number of my criticisms of his web page.

On the surface?  What, is there supposedly some deeper hidden truth to Ossus's BS, beneath the errors and lies?  Really, there is . . . he'll do or say anything to attack me, as demonstrated.   

Or, to translate his words:  "He'll beat me like a five-cent crack-whore, but believe me anyway."

Of course, Anderson will probably simply pass this portion of the page off as simple grandstanding, but I seek no glory in doing this.

The above is quite probably the biggest lie of the entire "rebuttal".   He seeks no glory in doing this?  Oh, come now . . . his entire point was seeking praise from his comrades, as demonstrated when he called for the Warsie Jihad and after his crap was posted.   He even started a thread at SD.Net entitled "well, how was it?", and one of the poll options was "all hail Ossus, destroyer of RSA".  

Oh, but he sought no glory, of course.  The fact that the tone of his crap was intentionally restrained from his usual vitriol naturally means he had stopped being a standard Rabid Warsie and was just being logical.  Or something.

I can only hope that through my work you—the reader—will be better able to differentiate between reason and madness, and that you will strive to apply what you have learned to both your future discussions and to your lives.

Check that out.   If you ever needed proof that he was obsessed, there it is.  He acts like this epilogue of his is a damn Nobel Prize acceptance speech, and thinks that by attacking my credibility he's doing good in people's lives!  I don't think demonstrating the futility of ignorance and lying techniques while claiming superiority would qualify for that . . . but then again, in this decadent era, I could be wrong.

Well, at least he got one thing right . . . there were things to be learned in his work regarding madness.  Unfortunately he and his displayed irrationality were the poison, and not the cure.  


Back to The Battle of Britain
Back to STvSW