ChaosSlimeGod - Profile

ChaosSlimeGod

ChaosSlimeGod

male LV 4

Chaos Slime God

2019-07-13 Joined Global

Badges 11

Moments 24

ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
ChaosSlimeGod
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to tourezx
Any fic of mine that is labeled as *Creative Release * in the synopsis is still a work in progress. Basically, unless I explicitly replace that with *Dropped* in the Synopsis, then it's still going to be updated at some point. Of course, when it gets released is another story. As I've stated, for now, this is all just practice for my original work and, once I shift focus to that, it'll probably be a while before my *Creative Releases* see any chapters. Once I've finished Reincarnated Into Mort Flesh, I'll get back to fleshing out the rest of these stories .
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to
This book has beed deleted.
ChaosSlimeGod
Commented
Just Updated the Synopsis, with my new Comment Deletion Policy. The following is my Ultimatum to FrightKnight88. If you didn't read all of the other comments we posted, you probably won't get a lot of it but it's there so people know he was warned and that they won't be seeing any of his future comments. 1. Examples of usage: Oh wait you mean those examples of "dopey gooberrish" technical correctness that I challenged you to find a published example of, because you and I both know no one intelligent talks like that? Yeah, I noticed how you failed that challenge and didn't bother mentioning, because it destroys your entire argument. 2. Dictionaries are God: Uh, no. Every time you try and make this idiotic claim, that dictionaries are some type of gospel that must be adhered to by all the good little masses, you prove to every educated person reading this that you know nothing about language, it's operations, and you especially know nothing about how dictionaries are made . The only thing I can say to this is, "Better go learn yoself some ejumakations, boy...or girl...or whatever you kids say these days" 3. Not using another word that means "to place under stress:" While the premise of this argument stems from your clearly inadequate understanding of the subject matter, the gist of your argument is essentially, "Hey, you used a synonym for words we already have instead some other synonym for words we already have and thats something that I feel passionately about and have to speak up." Weeeellll, just so happens, Retardo McSchmuck'n'Stuff, that one of those words that means "to put under stress" is "belabored." That's right! This whole time you were wrong and that's exactly why your initial comment about usage turned into an argument about definitions and your argument about definitions turned into an argument about the infallibility of dictionaries. It's also why during this entire exchange you've provided a grand total of zero explanations as to how you are right. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not accusing you of being intelligent or having logically consistent arguments, accompanied by examples, to make. Quite the contrary, I'm well aware of your situation. You didn't bother thinking about any of things that you wrote and just decided to run off at the mouth, never imagining that you'd be called out and be expected to explain how and why you're right. Now, you're ****ed because you never knew what you were talking about and still don't. You never had a well informed opinion and still don't. It is because of these reasons that, if you respond to this and don't include perfectly elaborated explanations as to how you're right, I will be starting a new list, congratulations you're first, of useless and witless Trolls who are only here to waste people's time. I'll delete every one of your previous comments and any future comments. If by some miracle you're belabored brain manages to come up with a coherent response, then feel free to continue posting as normal but, if you come at me again with these baseless and uninformed assertions of your presumed correctness, you'll be the first one on my list of known Trolls.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to FrightKnight88
1. Examples of usage: Oh wait you mean those examples of "dopey gooberrish" technical correctness that I challenged you to find a published example of, because you and I both know no one intelligent talks like that? Yeah, I noticed how you failed that challenge and didn't bother mentioning, because it destroys your entire argument. 2. Dictionaries are God: Uh, no. Every time you try and make this idiotic claim, that dictionaries are some type of gospel that must be adhered to by all the good little masses, you prove to every educated person reading this that you know nothing about language, it's operations, and you especially know nothing about how dictionaries are made . The only thing I can say to this is, "Better go learn yoself some ejumakations, boy...or girl...or whatever you kids say these days" 3. Not using another word that means "to place under stress:" While the premise of this argument stems from your clearly inadequate understanding of the subject matter, the gist of your argument is essentially, "Hey, you used a synonym for words we already have word instead some other synonym for words we already have and thats something that I feel passionately about and have to speak up." Weeeellll, just so happens, Retardo McSchmuck'n'Stuff, that one of those words that means "to put under stress" is "belabored." That's right! This whole time you were wrong and that's exactly why your initial comment about usage turned into an argument about definitions and your argument about definitions turned into an argument about the infallibility of dictionaries. It's also why during this entire exchange you've provided a grand total of zero explanations as to how you are right. Words that have multiple word parts are defined by the combination of definitions of their component parts. It's really not difficult for an intelligent person to utilize these types of words in non standard ways. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not accusing you of being intelligent or having logically consistent arguments, accompanied by examples, to make. Quite the contrary, I'm well aware of your situation. You didn't bother thinking about any of things that you wrote and just decided to run off at the mouth, never imagining that you'd be called out and be expected to explain how and why you're right. Now, you're ****ed because you never knew what you were talking about and still don't. You never had a well thought out argument and still don't. It is because of these reasons that, if you respond to this and don't include perfectly elaborated explanations as to how you're right, I will be starting a new list, congratulations you're first, of useless and witless Trolls who are only here to waste people's time. I'll delete every one of your previous comments and any future comments. If by some miracle you're belabored brain manages to come up with a coherent response, then feel free to continue posting as normal but, if you come at me again with these baseless and uninformed assertions of your presumed correctness, you'll be the first one on my list of known Trolls.
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to FrightKnight88
Ummm...so first of all, that is exactly how language works, at least the way I described it previously. You don't seem to understand the difference between usage and definitions, which clearly demonstrates that you're the one who doesn't know how language works. Second, dictionaries are not authoritative sources. They are references that simply show the most common usage. Have you ever heard of TIMES Most Beautiful People, ...Most Influential People? That's basically what a dictionary is only for definitions instead of people. Third and this goes back to first point, I specifically responded to your comment about usage, because popular usage is completely irrelevant when talking about "correct usage." Then, however, in your reply you switched to talking about definitions. The definition I gave you was completely in line with the realm logical possible definitions for that word. Laboring is a form of stress and, if you understand the definitions of the word parts, then you'd understand that this is a perfectly valid usage of this word. Fourth, I read your follow up in which you suggest that the correct word should be "labored." All I can say about that is this, you suggesting that "he labored his breathing" (which in my mind is a non punctuated sentence followed by a sentence fragment that says he labored and then nonsensicaly adds in "his breathing" for no reason) is the phrasing I "should" have used, simply goes to further demonstrate how little you understand about this whole language business. In order for Troy to transfer the state of laboring to his breathing, the term can't be a simple past tense verb it has to be a transitive verb like...uhh...I don't know...just off the top of my head "BELABORED." Who have you ever heard say, "I labored my men." or "He labored his legs." As a matter of fact, I challenge you find a single published instance of "labored" being used in a transitive form. So, the very best outcome for your clearly uninformed argument is that you could say "Well, if you wanted to sound really dopey and gooberrish, it's not technically incorrect to use labored as a transitive verb." Or you could be like me, look at the fact that in Old English they would frequently use the prefix be- to make transitive verbs, the fact that belabored's word parts already give it a definition that fits perfectly into this scenario, and just use the best word for the job. Oh... and also not go around mouthing off about how right you are when you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT!
ChaosSlimeGod
ChaosSlimeGod
Replied to the_fat_taoist
Not really. That's way more chaotic and dispersed. What he has in mind will be much more limited due to the fact that he has to control each one individually or as a uniform and coordinated whole.
ChaosSlimeGod
Review Details
Comments
Paragraph comments
Report user

Report inappropriate content
error Tip

Get More Coins

Please switch to the pop-up to complete the payment.