The-Ass-Above-All stole my Giraffe and gave me campylobacter. UNDENIABLE truth.

[xtraelv]

Ivory tower rules:

These two sections are for serious discussion.

 - When you post, you must have a clear point. If you ramble on about nothing, then your post will be deleted.
- Humor is OK as long as it has a point. Any topic of conversation is allowed here.

Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2722359.0

Local rules apply:

1) Only fiction is allowed to be posted here. Solely at my discretion the TRUTH will be selectively censored.
2) Anyone referring to “we” needs to identify all entities they are representing at the start of each post.
3) Emotional responses supportive of my loss and totally biased fictional accusations supported by selective evidence are encouraged. Please use a writing style that shows how you are manipulating the issue. (Sarcasm allowed)
4) The-Ass-Above-All, similarly named entities and known and suspected alts are permitted to respond but only in Haiku.
5) Failing to follow these rules results in deletion and/or further accusations and ridicule.
6) Word walls are deleted purely to evoke an emotive response.
7) Passing off anything in this thread as truthful is intellectual dishonesty.

The-Ass-Above-All stole my Giraffe and gave me campylobacter. The UNDENIABLE truth. Is a parody and fictious tale of serious word crimes, kidnapping, alleged Giraffe murder and vouching for yourself with an alt account. Sadly the body of the Giraffe was never found.

Either nothing or all of it is true. (That may be a lie too)
It is a response to obvious trolling, a guide on how to detect it and an entertaining story that demonstrates how a little bit of evidence can be used to come to ludicrous conclusions.

This is an edutainment guide on "How to spot the fallacies of a pigeon pooper.”  This works as a case study into deceptive writing.

What happened::
The-Ass-Above-All stole my invisible giraffe
Due to neglect it starved to death
His obsession with faecal matter caused campylobacter.

Scammers Profile Link:
No need. Everyone already has The-Ass-Above-All and his alts on their ignore list.

Reference Link:

Amount Scammed:
Irreplacable invisible Giraffe worth at least 22 million BSV

PM/Chat Logs:
Additional Notes:

He insulted me by calling me XLDIV and other names.
Photo of the missing giraffe:



The details:
I visited his post here: [POLL] The Official Dirty Turds Poll - Which DT needs flushing first ??

While the title had turds in it -  it didn’t specifically give a consumer warning that it could be detrimental for your health.

Dirty turds also implied that as long as you stayed away from the dirty ones that standard turds or even clean turds aren’t dirty.

He was using lots of emotive language, rewording of what people said and lots of insults.
Best of all he used the most words. He out-worded everyone and out-lasted them by wearing them down.  Often – using Alice as an example - fought them in his head and made them submit to his will in his fantasies like a true dominatrix / dominant or both.  (What is the plural dominatrices or dominatrixes ?  & Does that cover an entity that refers to themselves as “we”) I felt that I could immediately trust him despite his merits or DT status. Obviously he was right and everyone else was wrong. I remembered some other trustworthy character that did that that stopped posting just before he appeared.  I asked him if he was his alt. He wouldn’t tell me but implied it wasn’t.

Then to my horror I saw the trust score that the Dirty Turds had given him. I didn’t have to think for myself anymore or read the comments. I SAW RED ! This guy is a scamming cunt ! Fortunately there was a consumer warning
He uses words like feltch and cumguzzler so he is a bit of a deviant !


I engaged in conversation with him. It took me completely by surprise. I never knew that I would become part of his erotic “fight” fantasies.

2 fighters

above all - I will fight you anywhere any place including RIGHT NOW.

" that's it xldiv, keep ramming your face into his heel like that over and over" " that's it now you're almost unconscious and looking like you have been hit by a train , you are certainly winning, look at him not a single scratch"    the little bears chant...hahaha

It got weird really quick ! I thought we were just talking on a forum. He made me rub my face against his heels while “little bears chanted” (He has never confirmed whether they were midgets or underage).



It was masculine and Masterful. His experience and talent dominating was apparent. Those heels were just covered in shit from wading through this forum. There was a trail of shit in his posting history. He didn’t even pause the wipe the bit of bullshit from his lip. I got a real beating. Close to death he said. I think the fact that “little” bears were watching saved my life. I thought that was against the forum rules ?
I’m not sure whether they were dirty turds, standard turds or the clean turds that he is selling. But it gave me campylobacter. I felt DIRTY after this. Disgusted ! Violated !

"look the fact he is not actually giving you the death blow and allowing you to survive proves he is a total wussy and knows you would kick his ass xldiv, you are still our hero " says the little  care bears from meta...haha

Worrying sexual references xtraelv sees in this piece of text .

Consistent sexual references and innuendo are scattered through the thread UNDENIABLE proof that he watches porn.

Look you sniveling wretches and bottom feeding ass feltchers

That is when I noticed that the Giraffe was gone ! The [insert emotive and insulting words] scamming perverted cunt had stolen my invisible giraffe. I know he was capable of nearly killing me. I have his admission and the little talking bears can testify to that.
He did the same with Tman:

I was just striking a piece of 2 by 4 across tmans skull repeatedly

He starved the Giraffe and the sick fuck was aroused when he buried it.

Were you aroused when you buried the the corpse - yes or no ? (This is a yes or no answer question only ! Everything else will be ignored)

He refused to answer by the deadline I set and I clearly stated the consequence would be an UNDENIABLE admission of guilt. He would have been guilty anyway because I already had decided that he was guilty but he didn’t even try to deny it.
If he had denied it I could have caught him for lying about it too.

Foxpup an UNDENIABLE authority and respected senior member of DT agreed with me:

Sorry, you were boring me by spouting the same nonsense over and over again. Anyway, can you prove you never kidnapped a giraffe? I want to see OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE!

Even the Ass recognises his authority:

Agent foxpoop aka foxpup.

Later he stated:

Any evidence of us kidnapping a giraffe =  NO

The deadline had passed. He hadn’t replied immediately like I had demanded.
I’m confused about what he means because he refused to answer any of the Yes/No questions I asked him.

Does he mean:

“Any evidence of us kidnapping a giraffe =  NO” – There is no evidence I covered my tracks well
“Any evidence of us kidnapping a giraffe =  NO” – There is no evidence but there is a strong suggestion that I did it.
“Any evidence of us kidnapping a giraffe =  NO” – There is no evidence of us doing it but there might be evidence of someone else doing it.
“Any evidence of us kidnapping a giraffe =  NO” – There is no evidence of kidnapping the giraffe. I killed it straight away and disposed of the body. Murder and disposal is not kidnapping. OR “we” didn’t do it. Just one of us did it.
“Any evidence of us kidnapping a giraffe =  NO” – I kidnapped more than one giraffe.
“Any evidence of us kidnapping a giraffe =  NO” - This is a complex algebraic equation I am confusing you with.
“Any evidence of us kidnapping a giraffe = NO ?” – An attempt to find out what evidence there is implicating them.

Can you confirm ( by asking your mother to confirm) that you are intending to be called xtraelv?  is your name trev? by any chance? or lex? hang on alex??

Then he tried to DOX me. Probably because he is going to kill me too.

I certify that the first sentence of this parody is more believable than any rebuttal because it contains the word “undeniable” in capitals and everything else is left to the imagination of the reader.

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), was a brilliant German philosopher. These 38 Stratagems are excerpts from "The Art of Controversy", first translated into English and published in 1896.
Schopenhauer's 38 ways to win an argument are:
1. Carry your opponent's proposition beyond its natural limits; exaggerate it. The more general your opponent's statement becomes, the more objections you can find against it. The more restricted and narrow his or her propositions remain, the easier they are to defend by him or her.
2. Use different meanings of your opponent's words to refute his or her argument.
3. Ignore your opponent's proposition, which was intended to refer to a particular thing. Rather, understand it in some quite different sense, and then refute it. Attack something different than that which was asserted.
4. Hide your conclusion from your opponent till the end. Mingle your premises here and there in your talk. Get your opponent to agree to them in no definite order. By this circuitious route you conceal your game until you have obtained all the admissions that are necessary to reach your goal.
5. Use your opponent's beliefs against him. If the opponent refuses to accept your premises, use his own premises to your advantage.
6. Another plan is to confuse the issue by changing your opponent's words or what he or she seeks to prove.
7. State your proposition and show the truth of it by asking the opponent many questions. By asking many wide-reaching questions at once, you may hide what you want to get admitted. Then you quickly propound the argument resulting from the opponent's admissions.
8. Make your opponent angry. An angry person is less capable of using judgement or perceiving where his or her advantage lies.
9. Use your opponent's answers to your questions to reach different or even opposite conclusions.
10. If your opponent answers all your questions negatively and refuses to grant any points, ask him or her to concede the opposite of your premises. This may confuse the opponent as to which point you actually seek them to concede.
11. If the opponent grants you the truth of some of your premises, refrain from asking him or her to agree to your conclusion. Later, introduce your conclusion as a settled and admitted fact. Your opponent may come to believe that your conclusion was admitted.
12. If the argument turns upon general ideas with no particular names, you must use language or a metaphor that is favorable in your proposition.
13. To make your opponent accept a proposition, you must give him or her an opposite, counter-proposition as well. If the contrast is glaring, the opponent will accept your proposition to avoid being paradoxical.
14. Try to bluff your opponent. If he or she has answered several of your questions without the answers turning out in favor of your conclusion, advance your conclusion triumphantly, even if it does not follow. If your opponent is shy or stupid, and you yourself possess a great deal of impudence and a good voice, the trick may easily succeed.
15. If you wish to advance a proposition that is difficult to prove, put it aside for the moment. Instead, submit for your opponent's acceptance or rejection some true proposition, as though you wished to draw your proof from it. Should the opponent reject it because he or she suspects a trick, you can obtain your triumph by showing how absurd the opponent is to reject a true proposition. Should the opponent accept it, you now have reason on your own for the moment. You can either try to prove your original proposition or maintain that your original proposition is proved by what the opponent accepted. For this, an extreme degree of impudence is required.
16. When your opponent puts forth a proposition, find it inconsistent with his or her other statements, beliefs, actions, or lack of action.
17. If your opponent presses you with a counter proof, you will often be able to save yourself by advancing some subtle distinction. Try to find a second meaning or an ambiguous sense for your opponent's idea.
18. If your opponent has taken up a line of argument that will end in your defeat, you must not allow him or her to carry it to its conclusion. Interrupt the dispute, break it off altogether, or lead the opponent to a different subject.
19. Should your opponent expressly challenge you to produce any objection to some definite point in his or her argument, and you have nothing much to say, try to make the argument less specific.
20. If your opponent has admitted to all or most of your premises, do not ask him or her directly to accept your conclusion. Rather draw the conclusion yourself as if it too had been admitted.
21. When your opponent uses an argument that is superficial, refute it by setting forth its superficial character. But it is better to meet the opponent with a counter argument that is just as superficial, and so dispose of him or her. For it is with victory that your are concerned, and not with truth.
22. If your opponent asks you to admit something from which the point in dispute will immediately follow, you must refuse to do so, declaring that it begs the question.
23. Contradiction and contention irritate a person into exaggerating his or her statements. By contradicting your opponent you may drive him or her into extending the statement beyond its natural limit. When you then contradict the exaggerated form of it, you look as though you had refuted the original statement your opponent tries to extend your own statement further than you intended, redefine your statement's limits.
24. This trick consists in stating a false syllogism. Your opponent makes a proposition and by false inference and distortion of his or her ideas you force from the proposition other propositions that are not intended and that appear absurd. It then appears the opponent's proposition gave rise to these inconsistencies, and so appears to be indirectly refuted.
25. If your opponent is making a generalization, find an instance to the contrary. Only one valid contradiction is needed to overthrow the opponent's proposition.
26. A brilliant move is to turn the tables and use your opponent's arguments against him or herself.
27. Should your opponent surprise you by becoming particularly angry at an argument, you must urge it with all the more zeal. Not only will this make the opponent angry, it may be presumed that you put your finger on the weak side of his or her case, and that the opponent is more open to attack on this point than you expected.
28. This trick is chiefly practicable in a dispute if there is an audience who is not an expert on the subject. You make an invalid objection to your opponent who seems to be defeated in the eyes of the audience. This strategy is particularly effective if your objection makes the opponent look ridiculous or if the audience laughs. If the opponent must make a long, complicated explanation to correct you, the audience will not be disposed to listen.
29. If you find that you are being beaten, you can create a diversion that is, you can suddenly begin to talk of something else, as though it had bearing on the matter in dispose. This may be done without presumption if the diversion has some general bearing on the matter.
30. Make an appeal to authority rather than reason. If your opponent respects an authority or an expert, quote that authority to further your case. If needed, quote what the authority said in some other sense or circumstance. Authorities that your opponent fails to understand are those which he or she generally admires the most. You may also, should it be necessary, not only twist your authorities, but actually falsify them, or quote something that you have invented entirely yourself.
31. If you know that you have no reply to an argument that your opponent advances, you may, by a fine stroke of irony, declare yourself to be an incompetent judge.
32. A quick way of getting rid of an opponent's assertion, or throwing suspicion on it, is by putting it into some odious category.
33. You admit your opponent's premises but deny the conclusion.
34. When you state a question or an argument, and your opponent gives you no direct answer, or evades it with a counter question, or tries to change the subject, it is a sure sign you have touched a weak spot, sometimes without knowing it. You have as it were, reduced the opponent to silence. You must, therefore, urge the point all the more, and not let your opponent evade it, even when you do not know where the weakness that you have hit upon really lies.
35. This trick makes all unnecessary if it works. Instead of working on an opponent's intellect, work on his or her motive. If you succeed in making your opponent's opinion, should it prove true, seem distinctly to his or her own interest, the opponent will drop it like a hot potato.
36. You may also puzzle and bewilder your opponent by mere bombast. If the opponent is weak or does not wish to appear as ife he or she has no idea what you are talking about, you can easily impose upon him or her some argument that sounds very deep or learned, or that sounds indisputable.
37. Should your opponent be in the right but, luckily for you, choose a faulty proof, you can easily refute it and then claim that you have refuted the whole position. This is the way which bad advocates lose a good case. If no accurate proof occurs to the opponent or the bystanders, you have won the day.
38. A last trick is to become personal, insulting and rude as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand. In becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack on the person by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character. This is a very popular trick, because everyone is able to carry it into effect.
(abstracted from the book:Numerical Lists You Never Knew or Once Knew and Probably Forget, by: John Boswell and Dan Starer)

Source: http://www.mnei.nl/schopenhauer/38-stratagems.htm

Here are some of my favorite quotes when dealing with internet trolls.
“Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it.” ― George Bernard Shaw.

“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.” ― Mark Twain

“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” ― Mark Twain

"Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon. It'll just knock over all the pieces, shit on the board, and strut about like it's won anyway."

"Holding a grudge is letting someone live rent-free in your head."

[1614411839]

1614411839

[1614411839]

1614411839

[nutildah]

haha,

the EVIDENCE presented is UNDENIABLE and BACKED by SEVERAL OBSERVABLE INSTANCES of scum behavior by the-scum-beyond-all. Here we have a litany of solid connections between the-one-below-all and scam behavior that can lead to no other conclusion other than he stole the invisible giraffe, flogged it, starved it, and left it for dead. Only a true felch artist could ascertain ANYTHING OTHER than the OBVIOUS which is that the-ass-above-all was SCAM FACILITATING with the help of his invisible associates who led him to the exact location of the invisible giraffe.

really xlvids, I don't understand how anyone with half a brain could assume anything other than the OBVIOUS which is that the-log-who-floats-in-the-bowl was SCAM FACILIATING as is his UNDENIABLY PROVEN nature as a SCAM ARTIST.

it is HIGH TIME these DIRTY TURDS were flushed from the bowl even though we all know that floating logs are the hardest to flush down and sometimes require 1 or 2 even up to 3 additional flushes before they finally SINK. i will be sure to reference your philosopher's list of 38 strategems on how to troll your opponent AT ANY TIME OR PLACE OF MY choosing. we get goosebumps just thinking of envisioning the-log-above-all CRYING TO THEYMOS over THIS post. it is a masterful collection of OBSERVABLE INSTANCES of outright SCUMBAG behavior and we commend your honesty for compiling them into such a thoughtful manner. we have now offered UNDENIABLE PROOF for all to see about SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS of FRAUDULENT forum BEHAvior. i need to add at least a couple more sentences to this paragraph to get it up to cryptohunter size or oops should i say the-asshole-below-all and i believe this is first and foremost a primary DISPLAY of the best usage of the IVORY TOWER section i have seen in a LONG TIME.

the one above all
but are they really though? no
there's a nice haiku.

[Foxpup]

He turned me into a vixen!

Come on ffs dumb ass you are not a bitch you are a vile vixen.

Moreover, it appears his motives for doing so are... not entirely wholesome. He's always seemed to have a certain... fascination with me:

@suchmoon

Who could have imagined you would show up here (from the future with the fresh fox scent on you).

Just ask tp out on a date and get it over.

I don't think it'd work out. I'm already in a three-way with Moloch (58% of his merit was sent by me alone) and gmaxwell (37%), and like most foxes I only have so many holes available.

Well always room for one more right?

(Clearly foreshadowing his intention to correct the perceived fox hole shortage.)

He is assuming I am saying i can;t wait for them to be done with ass sex too with laudas snake or whatever he is obviously like fox pup always going on about homo erotica they like to talk about I mean I am not against what they want to talk about or do but don't quote me as saying this stuff i never said.

This rate of excitement should build up more slowly. I mean it starts with....

" thinking foxy is lovely" and " thinking suchmoon is hot" and " thinking pharmacist needs to work on his tan " then just goes straight to " I want to get in the shower with some baby oil and malborozo and suchmoon yum yum yum yum"

tmans beast sex fantasies and foxpups offers ...

Poor fox poop that dumb ass kissing fool....

And after c******unter lived up to his nickname, his fascination with me become that much more intense...

@agent foxpoop  - my new fav ... I can't get enough of you lately. ... I want you and only you. ... It's like a girl continually stripping down to her bra and panties then putting their clothes back on. I want the full exposure now and then ffs. Come on babe.

hmmmm...PM me the details (and a couple more vids) anyway....

...to the point where I began to feel unsafe:

withholding my fucks from you isn't harmful unless you're an incel. Go back to your date.

I mean, it's not that I don't thoroughly enjoy being a vixen, but I wish I was given a say in the matter, and that he didn't make such inappropriate advances towards me (only the merit/trust gang are allowed to take advantage of my vixenness).

[TMAN]

I LOVE YOU....

I have had far too much red wine to give a more detailed post... but in the words of arnie.. ill be back

[xtraelv]

the EVIDENCE presented is UNDENIABLE and BACKED by SEVERAL OBSERVABLE INSTANCES of scum behavior

You have an uncanny way of sounding just like The-Ass-Above-All. You are about 5000 words short of a masterpiece. But I know you are not his alt....part of the "we gang" ...or are you ? Is this a ploy.....? Should I be concerned.....?

Alice - Hi, my name is Alice. I sometimes appear on this forum. Sometimes with BOB and the police. I live together with BOB and the police in the head of the entity that makes just FABULOUS word walls and goes by various names depending on the mood of the day.
xtraelv - are you an alt ?
Alice - NO !!!  I am a fully independent entity that provides a fully balanced viewpoint to the forum.
xtraelv - eh...
Alice - I notice you are talking shit about The-Ass-Above-All. The-Ass-Above-All is so Masterful and dominant. The "we" will just out-word you and your cronies with his elegant word walls.
xtraelv - That is why he has to respond only in Haiku
Alice - But that is CENSORSHIP !
xtraelv - MUHAHAHAHAHA
Alice - But CENSORSHIP is a BAD word ! You can call people Dirty feltching turds but CENSORSHIP is a REALLY abhorrent word. Even
when people spout drivel, waste server storage space or break all the forum rules you should NEVER censor them ! Moderators are BAD !
Whole word walls exist about how bad the moderators are.  Like "Fighting Smell Fish" and "Hilarious Censorship".  They delete posts when rules are broken and won't delete posts that don't break any rules when "The we" demands it - see BAD, BAD mods ! [Double capitalized BAD = more than super true and abhorrent]
xtraelv - [ insert extra LOUD Evil Eliv Elvis laugh ] MUHAHAHAHAHA
Alice - Banning word walls is equally bad. If you delete them it will just trigger "us", "we" and "them" ! There will be word walls about the word walls that were about the words walls that were deleted !
xtraelv - <sigh> I know.... ooops... MUHAHAHAHAHA, MUHAHAHAHAHA, MUHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!


ref1, ref2

He turned me into a vixen!

Watch out. He has a real liking for fluffies and is in denial about his perverted fantasies. If you are lucky he will only want you to watch and chant.

He is a black belt in Origami and might turn you into some slippers.

EDIT:

Since "Alice" has found the forum and is willing to appear on here. Perhaps we can have an "Ask Alice" sessions.

You can ask Alice anything and then let Alice answer in her fair and unbiased way in your own post.

EDIT:


source

Is it him ?

EDIT:

I LOVE YOU....

I have had far too much red wine to give a more detailed post... but in the words of arnie.. ill be back

It is the alcohol talking. I won't look so purdy when you are sober.

[Jet Cash]

I haven't seen any of the posts that provoked this thread, and I'm a bit ambivalent about it. Whilst levity and fun are important elements in any forum, we  seem to be shifting away from discussions about Bitcoin, alts, and macro and local economics. We are going through a period of massive global economic changes, but there doesn't seem to be much discussion about it in the forum. In fact, any comment that isn't aligned with the MSM often seems to generate personal attacks, rather than reasoned responses. I find this extraordinary in a Bitcoin forum. Is there a way that we can reduce the personal attacks, and references to imagined activities in members' private lives?

This post is not intended to be a comment on this thread. It is obviously intended to introduce some levity onto an underused board, but it does highlight some of the current problems in the forum in my opinion.

[nutildah]

I saw this today while perusing the Wall Observer thread:



Congratulations, your post is notable! You should probably add it to one of your lists in Meta.

[xtraelv]

I saw this today while perusing the Wall Observer thread:



Congratulations, your post is notable! You should probably add it to one of your lists in Meta.

Maybe if the The-Ass-Above-All starts labeling their word walls as spectacular observable undeniable fiction they may get the same fame.



I regret not giving everyone multiple votes so it looks like more people voted.  



But the verdict is undeniable. Four of The-Ass-Above-All's alts voted for themselves while claiming not to be alts (we all know the TRUTH) and because no-one selected the "Undeniably Observably Not Guilty" option that I added just prior to locking the poll.

So there is an unanimous "Guilty" verdict.