If you come to India, you know what we do to Anglo people?

He's thinking, just as the rest of us do, that you're a liar.

He's not thinking that. No thought's gone into it. He started with that conclusion and, regardless of any logic presented, he's going to stick with it. Over something so completely trivial as to be asinine in the extreme. I don't give a shit whether the anecdote is believed or not, but what's irritating is to be called a liar based on absolutely zero evidence or logic that I am one.

You'd think that's peachy, though, if that was done to you, right?

But, wait, let me guess: you're going to claim that I'm "being an asshole". For what? For refusing to take a baseless and unprovoked insult lying down.

Even if your laughable claim were true. You would've only heard a handful of words. There's no way you could've emulated words you hadn't heard, and you would've had to have done to answer back to the man and inform him you were in the same office (as you claimed up thread)....and for those words you couldn't directly emulate you'd have had to know the language and local dialect inflection to ensure that those additional words were believable.

I think the "funny anecdote" just further confirms the constant lies and trolling bullshit you spread around this place in contrast to your nonsense "experiement has ended" claim that you're not really a douchebag.

I have zero evidence of the fact that you can't speak any of the languages used in India? Ok, then, which ones can you speak?

You're going beyond stupid. You're definitely going into "special person" territory.

Which it is. Because, believe it or not, the accent I heard over the phone that day was not exactly an accent I had never before heard in my entire life. Shocking, that, I'm sure.

It goes to your pattern of behavior. You have actively lied about almost everything for years. You get no benefit of doubt.

If I had established a pattern of actively lying for several years, I really wouldn't have a valid basis to complain.

No, not calling you an asshole on the specifics. I already allowed up above that you might be telling the truth, no matter how ridiculous the claim appears. But what does it matter? You lie and you lie and you lie some more. There is no rational basis to believe you about anything, even the trivial.

Does Harry Shearer speak any of the languages of India? Fisher Stevens? Do you think James Doohan learned to speak Gàidhlig? Did Maurice LeMarche actually transmutate into Orson Welles?

You're the one starting shit here in this thread, Chup. You are. Gul's backing you on it, like a good Dim to your Georgie. Just so we have our parties clear.

How could you know that when you don't know where the guy was from or what dialect he speaks? To a western ear a great deal of them sound the same when heard by way of spoken English.

Come on, which which Indian languages and dialects do you understand sufficiently to have been able to know which one it was? Name them. When had you heard them?

A pattern which you high-handedly claim to object to but which you are currently reinforcing. This one's on you, Gul. You don't like this shit? Then fucking stop.

I'd also add that this comes right off the back of him saying that he has been projecting a false personality on here for God knows how long which, if true, would constitute a deception on a grand scale.

Vocal. Impressionism. It does not require an understanding of the genitive language which spawned the accent.

For the record, Jimmy Doohan isn't a convincing Scotsman to a Brit, and are you saying that cartoon Indians from American animated comedies are accurate accents? As for Fisher Stevens, I'm highly doubtful that to an Indian his accent was authentic since he's a Jewish American, not someone of Indian heritage. What next, Peter Seller's accent in The Party was an excellent Gujurati accent?

All you're doing is confirming my own point for me, that all you see is one accent that sounds similar because of the region it comes from. You're totally ignorant to the different languages and dialects that exist in India that renders your claim virtually impossible. In fact, I'd go further than that and say you're displaying ignorance to the nature of phonetics. You know, I have a colleague of Indian heritage who speaks Hindi, but even she has difficulty communicating with or understanding Indian clients of different dialect or language. But ol' Castle from Arizona's skid row knows all there is to know to be an entirely convincing Indian.

Oh do keep it up man, you're giving me a good laugh.

You're the one starting shit here in this thread, Chup. You are. Gul's backing you on it, like a good Dim to your Georgie. Just so we have our parties clear.

It does to sufficiently convince someone of native stock that it's authentic.

Is your argument that if you spoke to someone with a Hindi speaker with an "impression" of an Urdu accent with inflections from a different regional dialect he couldn't tell the difference? You're also discounting the fact that your voice would naturally also carry American inflections, particularly as you're untrained by a vocalist, irrespective of whatever mistakes you make on the Indian side of things.

I'll tell you what, if you've got the balls, why don't you record a sampling of your accents. You know what area I practice in and that I'm no stranger to accents. Post up your Indian, Scots, Cockney accents and and an English accent of any regional variety of your choice, and lets see which, if any, are convincing to me or anyone else here who is familiar with said accents.

Oh dear, still trying to claim your own behavior isn't your responsibility? That worked so well for you in that attempted call out thread. Everybody knows what you sell, and we aren't buying. I told you once before that if you wanted people to treat you with respect, you'd have to convince them that you had changed. That takes more than an announcement. It takes a few months of good behavior. Then, and only then, will people start to believe you.

I'm not starting shit, I'm proving that you're a lying, trolling turd and that your "new leaf" is a fraud.

Indeed, and probably the best way to do that is not by telling lies immediately after you've alleged you've been carrying out a huge lie to experiment on people without consent.

*opens thread control panel*

"Destruct sequence 1, code 1-1 A."
.
"Destruct sequence 2, code 1-1 A-2B."
.
"Destruct sequence 3, code 1 B-2B-3."
.
"Code zero zero zero. Destruct. Zero."

Still trying to claim I'm not responding to anything? And you're not going to get good behavior for bad. A few months of a free ride to slap the dog and laugh without getting bit? You know better than that, or at any rate you should.

Here's my counter-offer, and just to show that I'm generous, mine's a lot easier than yours. You and your little coterie of toddlers stop acting like dicks toward me, and I give you a guarantee that you won't get what a coterie of little dicks gets. But if you want to get bit, and behave like people who want to get bit, I can't give you any guarantees.

I think that's more than fair.

That's not a threat, of course. I'm just reminding you that human beings will behave the way human beings behave. Nobody's patience is inexhaustible. If you and your little cheer squad keep poking me, I'm not obligated to suffer it without response indefinitely. But it's all on you -- whether or not to keep poking is your choice.

How many of the "coterie of toddlers" have been acting like an arsehole for years on end as part of an experiment for which they didn't seek the consent of others?

Do you want to just answer that and then maybe you can explain how you're on equal footing with them.

Let's rephrase that, why don't we. "How can Gul and Chup continue to justify provoking a response, then pretend to be entirely innocent of the provocation if one comes?"

The answer is, you can't.

So you can't answer the question I put to you?

Why not?

I've elected not to because the question is disingenuous, designed to absolve you of any responsibility for your current behavior.

It's not disingenuous, it's a yes or no question, and my current behaviour amounts to nothing more than an illustration of your lies.

Let's ask again. Has anyone else on this board deliberately trolled this community with the intention of getting a reaction without the consent of the members?

Yes or no?

The fun thing about disingenuous lines of argument is that the more you protest the dishonesty, the more apparent the dishonesty becomes.

You're a writer yet you don't even know what disingenuous means. Dear oh dear. If it's a question based on a false premise, what is the false premise?

Ok, I'll ask it again another way. Did you or did you not claim that your years long arsehole behaviour was an non-consensual experiment you are carrying out for your work. Yes or no?

The false premise is the implicit premise that your current behavior has anything to do with my present behavior.

So I'll ask this very simply: Under what conditions will you accept responsibility for your own behavior?

Look, you can't have it both ways. You can't conduct an elaborately deceitful experiment with the express purpose of making people angry and then pretend that it's not your fault that they're angry. To be honest, you're lucky people aren't more angry. What you did was a horrendous violation of civil behavior. You've earned worse than what we've given you, and don't expect people to forget what you did. You're objectively an awful person. The onus is on you to not only apologize, but to also reform. Convincingly reform. Until then, you're an asshole, and people will treat you accordingly.

And by 'accordingly' you mean they're going to act like assholes, hypocritically not expecting to get what they give. Besides which, your own admission is that almost no one actually gave a damn. There are just a few vindictive assholes hanging onto it in order to justify their own assholery.

Well, guess what -- those who do were assholes to begin with. I'm not remotely impressed. Your rationalizing has all the moral solidity of a snot-soaked Kleenex.