quentron.com

[profitis]

@sarkeizen ok so i ask you again then. do you agree with my last quotation or not.yes or no

[sarkeizen]

do you agree with my last quotation or not.yes or no

Agree, in what sense?

Also thanks for implicitly admitting that you lied about my agreeing with your statement.  I'd like to say that you have been pretty unethical through this entire discussion.  Want to explain your unethical behavior?  I've caught you in several deceptions, you've broken promises and in general kind of trampled all over the social contract that most people seem to consider implied in a discussion.  You might want to try and be a better person.  Just a thought.

[profitis]

@sarkeizen youre the nasty one,you called me an obstructionist asshole i didnt call you an obstructionist asshole. Ok i lied but i feel it was justified because you evaded my question pertaining to my quote that time by rapid deliberate attempted diversion of the subject(the quote) onto a plethora of other issues so yes i lied about you agreeing with a quote from the highest institution of electrochem in the states.sorry .so now you ask me in what sense do i ask you a yes or no question pertaining to either agreeing or disagreeing with the same quote from the same highest institution? Its cleary you who is obstructing not me @sarkeizen.im simply asking you if you think that what they say in their statement is consistent with fact,yes or no.

[sarkeizen]

@sarkeizen youre the nasty one

I'm saying you were UNETHICAL not mean.  There's an important difference.  If you want someone to do something for you on the internet - like examine a quote or discuss something there's a requirement of good faith which you have repeatedly broken.

you called me an obstructionist asshole

Dude that's entirely, completely and utterly what you are.  It's a label, when you get older you should consider getting your name permanently changed to that.

Either you had a textbook or you didn't.  If you didn't you should have said instead of spending a lot of time trying to avoid the question.
If you need to change your thesis.  You should say, not constantly avoid the question.
Ether you were going to fulfill your promise or you shouldn't have promised (not to mention the other times where you didn't promise but did express intent).

Next time just argue, don't try all this deceptive shit.

Ok i lied but i feel it was justified

And somehow you don't think you're an asshole.  Wow.  Score one for the power of being blind to your own flaws.

because you evaded my question pertaining to my quote...deliberate attempted diversion of the subject(the quote)

Seriously?  You made a statement that I asked TWENTY TIMES for you to support in the manner that it was stated.  What I'm guilty of is trying to keep you ON THE POINT.  Which you said was "focus on the textbooks".  Which I tried to but you kept deliberately trying to change the subject. 

Do you seriously not see that what you have described is YOU not me?

so now you ask me in what sense do i ask you a yes or no question pertaining to either agreeing or disagreeing with the same quote from the same highest institution?

The problem is that you are entirely incorrect.  It's not just a yes or no question.  If what you mean is do I consider it factually correct.  I simply have no opinion until I read it in context and perhaps ask you some questions.

That ain't obstructing that's just good sense.  So about that cite...

[profitis]

@sarkeizen sure i must remember that your not an electrochemist and thus be more err accomodating,duely noted but your just being silly now.any person with basic high school knowledge knows that batteries run until equilibrium and you know it too so youre obviously hellbent on sidetracking and trying to be funny for some reason which is lame.its for similar such reasons i mirrored your ways and delayed my promise,which incidently we wont be needing after you answer my question,do batteries run until equilibrium @sarkeizen,yes or no.focus on my question now forget  the textbook please,yes or no @sarkeizen.