Crap The Joker (Scouse and Toht "discussion", best stay away unless you're a bit insane :p)

[old.Tohtori]

Yes but as the Joker. Anything he does as the Joker doesn't count, cause your example is about what made him the way he is. Past, before, reasons for him becomign what he is, different from the doctor example.

Your own very words; "However, his postion is that if he'd been brought up in a violent home, bad friends, drug use etc. etc. - then he can see no reason why he wouldn't kill and maim.

The joker is just this doctor brought up with a violent past..."

A car crash, self harm, batman punching his lights out, a chicken mcnugget accident, ANYTHING is equally possible because we, don't, know.

Hell, from someone who claims facts and such are important and toots about it on every given chance, you sure are on a speculation roll here.

 

[Scouse]

Why don't you just answer basic, simple questions with simple answers, Toht?

Question I'd like answered: Do you and toht honestly think that it's against the balance of probabilities that he's a self harmer or has a violent past?

Please?

 

[old.Tohtori]

I did answer it. Here's the answer again; "A car crash, self harm, batman punching his lights out, a chicken mcnugget accident, ANYTHING is equally possible because we, don't, know."

Though i have to take batman out of that equation due to batman i nolanverse not knowing the joker from before.

Stop trying to fish for a certain type of answer that can fit in your twistyturny argument

Here's a very valid counter-question;

Do you know anything about the jokers past, before he already was the joker?

Or in other words...oh this is good; what facts do you have that support that he had a self-harming, or violent past before he was the joker?

 

[Scouse]

Stop trying to fish for a certain type of answer that can fit in your twistyturny argument

I'm not. I want a simple answer to a simple question. Nothing more or less.

As usual, you're refusing to provide a clear answer.

It's a simple question.

Question I'd like answered: Do you honestly think that it's against the balance of probabilities that he's a self harmer or has a violent past?

Gwan Toht. I dares ya

 

[gohan]

Leaving tevezed aside (kettles don't give you a chelsea smile) it *could* have been a car crash - but again, highly unlikely.

They've very specific scars. I say it's safe to assume that he either did it to himself or someone did it to him.


Question I'd like answered: Do you and toht honestly think that it's against the balance of probabilities that he's a self harmer or has a violent past?



Which would make him a self-harmer....

no im just being a cunt xD

 

[Scouse]

no

See Toht! It's easy to give your answer to yes/no questions

 

[old.Tohtori]

I answered it already. Twice.

 

[Scouse]

I answered it already. Twice.

You haven't. You know you haven't. It's a yes/no question.

In your opinion is it against the balance of probabilites that he is either a self harmer or a violent past?

The only answers are either YES, it's against the balance of probabilities, or NO it's not against the balance of probabilites.


Which is it?

 

[old.Tohtori]

I'll answer it in your anal way, if you answer this;

Do you have facts about the time before the joker became the joker? Yes or no.

Ofcourse you need to show those facts if you answer yes so...

 

[caLLous]

Yes or no Toht. Jesus.

You say loads and loads of words but never really actually SAY anything. Answering a yes or no question with "yes" or "no" isn't anal in the slightest, it's kinda just doing what the asker asked.

 

[old.Tohtori]

What part of "he could've harmed himself" does one not understand?

The fact is that the question is irrelevant if we're talking about the time before he was the joker as there's no evidence either which way.

 

[Scouse]

I'll answer it in your anal way, if you answer this

I'll answer your question directly and simply as soon as you answer mine.

That's what a discussion is Toht. It's an exchange of information.

If the discussion is to be worthwhile it helps if the other person is honest and open...


*predicts more evasion or possibly refusal to answer or simple ignore*

 

[old.Tohtori]

I'm not sure which is which in this terminology, yes or no, but the answer is that all sides/possibilities are equally possible. Be it yes or no then. Neither/none has the upper hand.

If answering yes means that all are equally possible, including self harm and such, then it's yes.
If no means that all are equal possibilities, then that is the answer.

I don't understand why you have to make it so difficult when the answer is in what i've said already.

The possibilities are balanced, so, no? *shrug*

Dick edit by the way.

 

[Scouse]

*predicts more evasion*

*wearily accepts inevitability*

 

[Jupitus]

shit thread tbpfh

 

[Wazzerphuk]

 

[caLLous]

Cancer on top of the AIDS you were already riddled with? You poor thing.

 

[Wij]

OK - only skim read the thread and not that interested in fictional characters but the early on bits I have to agree with Seely.

Mad I take as a synonym for insane.

Psychopaths are NOT insane (usually; they COULD be both psychotic and insane but generally they aren't). Nor are they psychotic. These are simple facts.

A dose of Chlorpromazine will do nothing for a psychopath. It isn't a psychotic episode.

The Big Brother psychologist was my lecturer and he was a nob

 

[old.Tohtori]

*wearily accepts inevitability*

As said, the question is not completely understood. Ask it in another manner, or deduct it from what is already said. I think the answer is no, but i can't be sure as i'm not a f*cking layer. Your inability to accept my answer is ridicilous.

Are you asking "is it possible that the scars are self harm"? Which i answered already several times as yes. This is why people can't discuss anything with you; no sense of context or reading comprehension.

No matter though, you've failed in every single point you're tried to make and the general answer is "toht is right", which i know is impossible for you to comprehend, so i'm not expecting any actual acceptance of the issue.

 

[Gwadien]

Is this still going on?

Chuck Norris or Bear Grylls?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah i don't know why it's going on since i've proven Scouse wrong on every turn, but chuck norris ofcourse. While a snake like survivor, Grylls isn't exactly fighty fighty

Funniest part is that Scouse is liking and such on comments that are towards him too and agreeing with posts that show that i'm right.