Scrap, get your arse over here!

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Nice way to dodge the facts.

The timestamp should be Callaway and not you, based on what you said.

[odeon]

What *are* the facts, Scrappy?

[Yuri Bezmenov]

That depends what "is" is.


Your obfuscation proves your mendacity.

[odeon]

I repeat: what are the facts? Back up your shit. Or shut up, after admitting you were wrong.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

I've already stated them, quit fucking around. 

[odeon]

I'll help you, then:

There is an edit timestamp on a post, with me having done an edit.

That's it. Now, tell me how you translate this to "odeon edited a link to point at B rather than A".

You're my bitch now. I know, you were MLA's already but we'll just have to share.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

I'll help you, then:

There is an edit timestamp on a post, with me having done an edit.

That's it. Now, tell me how you translate this to "odeon edited a link to point at B rather than A".

You're my bitch now. I know, you were MLA's already but we'll just have to share.

The last "edit" was done by Callaway which means her timestamp should be there instead of yours, at least according to what you said.

You claimed that unsticking a thread leaves an edit stamp, that was a lie.

Now your story is shifting, you just admitted to editing my post, you're just playing the game of "you can't prove exactly how I altered it".

Fucking mendacious piece of shit!! 

[odeon]

Unsticking a thread leaves a timestamp--everything requiring a save does. That's why they are called "edits". Quite simple, really, and something even you should be able to grasp.

While mostly done on the first post (I know I always do that), a sticky/unsticky edit is possible on any post in a thread since the property is actually set on a thread, not on a single post. In other words, if I do a sticky on the first post and Callaway an unsticky on another post in the same thread, my edit timestamp would remain on the first post while hers would be on that other one. I just tested it on my ask away thread, back and forth and on a couple of my own posts, and then on the QnA thread--go have a look.

I can't find a timestamp signed by Callaway anywhere in your old thread, however, which means that she unstickied the thread directly in her reply to MLA and so there wouldn't be an edit timestamp by Callaway, only the timestamp of her original post. Both use the same piece of code but are presented differently, depending on the state of the message itself.

As for your link, it would appear that you don't know how to do that sort of thing either.

Mine is a better explanation than yours because it is rational and explains what happened and how, rather than requiring a tinfoil hat on an idiot to be believed.

Now bend over, bitch.

[odeon]

You've not been excused. Don't get me wrong, this is fun and everything, but to revive an old thread to boost your paranoia will get me first dibs. Sorry, MLA.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Unsticking a thread leaves a timestamp--everything requiring a save does. That's why they are called "edits". Quite simple, really, and something even you should be able to grasp.

While mostly done on the first post (I know I always do that), a sticky/unsticky edit is possible on any post in a thread since the property is actually set on a thread, not on a single post. In other words, if I do a sticky on the first post and Callaway an unsticky on another post in the same thread, my edit timestamp would remain on the first post while hers would be on that other one. I just tested it on my ask away thread, back and forth and on a couple of my own posts, and then on the QnA thread--go have a look.

I can't find a timestamp signed by Callaway anywhere in your old thread, however, which means that she unstickied the thread directly in her reply to MLA and so there wouldn't be an edit timestamp by Callaway, only the timestamp of her original post. Both use the same piece of code but are presented differently, depending on the state of the message itself.

As for your link, it would appear that you don't know how to do that sort of thing either.

Mine is a better explanation than yours because it is rational and explains what happened and how, rather than requiring a tinfoil hat on an idiot to be believed.

Now bend over, bitch.

Oooh, PLEASE!!  You want me to believe that you unstickied and then stickied just for the fuck of it??

odeon, your fingerprints are on the murder weapon, there's a dead body in the trunk of your car and you're telling the cop that you were just out target shooting and you don't know where the body came from. 

My link got altered and yours is the edit stamp.  It's a pretty airtight case, I'm not buying your attempt at plausible deniability.

I should probably just call you Hillary from now on.

[Jack]

Oooh, PLEASE!!  You want me to believe that you unstickied and then stickied just for the fuck of it??

Say for the sake of argument you're right. So what? What are you getting at here?

[odeon]

Unsticking a thread leaves a timestamp--everything requiring a save does. That's why they are called "edits". Quite simple, really, and something even you should be able to grasp.

While mostly done on the first post (I know I always do that), a sticky/unsticky edit is possible on any post in a thread since the property is actually set on a thread, not on a single post. In other words, if I do a sticky on the first post and Callaway an unsticky on another post in the same thread, my edit timestamp would remain on the first post while hers would be on that other one. I just tested it on my ask away thread, back and forth and on a couple of my own posts, and then on the QnA thread--go have a look.

I can't find a timestamp signed by Callaway anywhere in your old thread, however, which means that she unstickied the thread directly in her reply to MLA and so there wouldn't be an edit timestamp by Callaway, only the timestamp of her original post. Both use the same piece of code but are presented differently, depending on the state of the message itself.

As for your link, it would appear that you don't know how to do that sort of thing either.

Mine is a better explanation than yours because it is rational and explains what happened and how, rather than requiring a tinfoil hat on an idiot to be believed.

Now bend over, bitch.

Oooh, PLEASE!!  You want me to believe that you unstickied and then stickied just for the fuck of it??

odeon, your fingerprints are on the murder weapon, there's a dead body in the trunk of your car and you're telling the cop that you were just out target shooting and you don't know where the body came from. 

My link got altered and yours is the edit stamp.  It's a pretty airtight case, I'm not buying your attempt at plausible deniability.

I should probably just call you Hillary from now on.

Do you have readability issues? It's either sticky or unsticky, and since Callaway did the latter, I did the former.

I'm pretty sure you fucked up the link when writing the post and then, five years later, woke up to the fact and now blame me for your ineptness. I had no reason then and no reason now to alter your link.

Bend over.

[odeon]

Oooh, PLEASE!!  You want me to believe that you unstickied and then stickied just for the fuck of it??

Say for the sake of argument you're right. So what? What are you getting at here?

He is feeding his paranoia. He thought he had a smoking gun, but what he has is a post he fucked up in the first place but now thinks I did.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Do you have readability issues? It's either sticky or unsticky, and since Callaway did the latter, I did the former.

Your story has changed for the 3rd time now. I'm the one who originally stickied it. Still a lie.

I'm pretty sure you fucked up the link when writing the post and then, five years later, woke up to the fact and now blame me for your ineptness. I had no reason then and no reason now to alter your link.

Gaslighting

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Oooh, PLEASE!!  You want me to believe that you unstickied and then stickied just for the fuck of it??

Say for the sake of argument you're right. So what? What are you getting at here?

He is feeding his paranoia. He thought he had a smoking gun, but what he has is a post he fucked up in the first place but now thinks I did.