Sandman
For me, such things are important, which is why you see me *always* support my claims, like earlier, when Tony called me a liar when saying that the Colonial store consisted of some 70% "hobby stuff", I then proceeded to prove that I was pretty much dead on with that estimate.

Tony Cooper
The figure is a patently false statement. Claiming that the store is "70% hobby stuff" is a claim about the store's inventory.

Sandman
No it isn't, troll. It's a claim about how much floor space is devoted to "hobby stuff". Do you know how I know? Because I made the claim. That's how. Stop trying to tell me what I mean. And learn to read English.

Tony Cooper
Oh, so you meant what you didn't say?

Unless you did an inventory, and counted the items, you have no idea of what percentage is "hobby stuff".

Sandman
Even so - by counting single items, the store is probably a lot more than 70% "hobby stuff" given the size of all the model kits stashed on top of each other row after row.

Tony Cooper
Yes. I'm sure. Balsa strips are probably inventoried individually. What the size of the kit is has little to do with percentage of inventory that kit represents. You seem to confuse "quantity" with "size".

Or, is this another place where I'm supposed to know what you meant because you wrote it, and not take what you wrote as what you meant?

It can be contended that the store has a 100% inventory of "hobby stuff" since camera products can be "hobby stuff".

Sandman
Semantics, the idiot trolls last resort.

Tony Cooper
And yet most of your arguments are based on defending your bumbling attempts to write a sentence that means what you want it to mean.

Your failures in lexical semantics are the source of much of disagreements here.

Sandman
That's how you support a claim, not by telling Tony that he's blind if don't know it.

Tony Cooper
No, you support a claim by making a sensible claim in the first place.

Sandman
WTF? How dumb are you? You can't support a claim by making a "sensible claim",

Tony Cooper
If your claim is sensible in the first place, the support for it is often self-evident and certainly easier to provide.

The claim has to be sensible to be supported because your support has to relate to actual claim made, not the non-sensible way you originally made the claim.

Sandman
how brain damages did you get when the truck hit you, Tony?

Tony Cooper
No truck hit me. Let alone a Volvo.