Can non-threshold susbtances have threshold type tests

[Spoon23]

I agreed to what YOU said was fair.

I said NO to a VAGUE CHALLENGE . You know, just like you didn't want this CURRENT CHALLENGE to be VAGUE!!!

KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!


.

Duh?? ADP02 SAYS NO to a vague debate. That is why he wants everything clear on the range of scope this debate is about. Like a clear debate. PARAMETERS ARE TO BE ESTABLISHED you nitwit. You need to agree to ADP02's parameters. You can add yours and I will ask ADP02 if it's alright with him


1. Judges will settle what was the scope.

Huh?? Are you fuvkn' dumb? The scope is defined from the start of the argument. You have to agree of the scope of the debate. What is the full scope. That's why I listed to you questions to agree on.

2. Initial statements not to be backed away from.

Initial statements that are quoted can be used to discredit opponent.

3. Use any additional information that you want.

Off course this is fine as long as it supports your scope. Irrelevant topics is a waste of time. That's why I gave you a list of the parameters of the scope, that you need to agree to get this show on the road.

4. Permanent ban

Perma Bann is given to the loser.

5. All points.

All points given to the winner.


SAY YES TO ALL THIS TRAVESTYNY AND WE CAN GO TO THE ACTUAL DEBATE PROPER.

so does it appear that travestyny is ok with the scope and exclusions that were agreed?


travesty are you okay with this??


yes or no

"can or does epo testing have threshold type criteria?"

exclusions: only 1. Scope is not about whether epo is a threshold substance.

Also,

t/e ratio screening test - i had even provided to you multiple times including where you agreed this point.

are you ok with that point too?

yes or no


initial statements, i had a "note" to state that there are more tests and procedures concerning how epo is tested than what i have stated thus far. I will discuss that too once we start this debate.

are you ok with that too?

yes or no



you provided your statement that you found no talk of a "threshold" for epo testing in wada documents.

are you ok with that too?

yes or no



you stated that you looked at epo technical documents and anything and everything mentioned was in scope and game?

are you ok with that too?


yes or no




.

If you agree to all this Travesty.

Then there is no more reason to delay this any longer, unless you want to flake off again. It's game time!! Put up or shut up biatch!

Say Yes to agree with this terms. Then we are ready for a debate. And will get this show on the road.


PUT UP OR SHUT UP BIATCH!!

[travestyny]

YO, ADP02, EVEN YOUR BOY SPOON SAID....

1. ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE AND LET THE JUDGES DECIDE WHAT WAS THE SCOPE.

2. HE SAID OUT OF SCOPE MEANS INADMISSIBLE.

3. HE SAID USE ANY INFORMATION YOU WANT AFTER THAT.



I ACCEPT. DO YOU ACCEPT? YES OR NO? DON'T LET Spoon23 DOWN!!!!!

Just pay the points that you owe me, and we do it for....

PERMANENT BAN.
ALL POINTS.

ACCEPT OR DECLINE? WHAT IS YOUR ANSWER????

[img]//media.*****.com/media/l3E6uhDAN3W7vylji/*****.gif[/img]

Don't forget the most important part that you agreed on Travesty.



In that if there were "additional evidence" that can be used to show evidence that the athlete was using EPO, it can be used.[/B]

LOOK AT THESE POSTS, BlTCH. AFTER I POSTED THEM, THE ONLY THING YOU SAID WAS DON'T FORGET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION COULD BE GIVEN.


I SAID I ACCEPT.


DO YOU ACCEPT? YES OR NO? THIS IS YOUR LAST CHANCE, F@GGOT. ACCEPT OR FOREVER BE MY BlTCH. I'M WAITING!!!!!

[Spoon23]

LOOK AT THESE POSTS, BlTCH. AFTER I POSTED THEM, THE ONLY THING YOU SAID WAS DON'T FORGET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION COULD BE GIVEN.


I SAID I ACCEPT.


DO YOU ACCEPT? YES OR NO? THIS IS YOUR LAST CHANCE, F@GGOT. ACCEPT OR FOREVER BE MY BlTCH. I'M WAITING!!!!!

I am making sure everything is clear and concise and within the parameters to make sure this doesn't go off course in a vicious cycle of another nonsense loop. ADP02 has a right to put his pre-fight parameters. You can have yours as well. Both have to agree. Then we can start. I want it clear the scope of this battle.

PARAMETERS ARE NEEDED TO BE SET SO THAT THIS DEBATE WON'T GO OUT OF SCOPE.


Plus, we have to agree to how many posts is the combatant allowed to debate before the final bell.

This question is for you and ADP02. How many post for each combatant? 10? 20? 30? 40?

Give a number guys. I will add this in the set of conditions. More than the set of post agreed upon will be inadmissible to this court.

[travestyny]

I am making sure everything is clear and concise and within the parameters to make sure this doesn't go off course in a vicious cycle of another nonsense loop. ADP02 has a right to put his pre-fight parameters. You can have yours as well. Both have to agree. Then we can start. I want it clear the scope of this battle.

PARAMETERS ARE NEEDED TO BE SET SO THAT THIS DEBATE WON'T GO OUT OF SCOPE.


Plus, we have to agree to how many posts is the combatant allowed to debate before the final bell.

This question is for you and ADP02. How many post for each combatant? 10? 20? 30? 40?

Give a number guys. I will add this in the set of conditions. More than the set of post agreed upon will be inadmissible to this court.

I GIVE 2 SHlTS ABOUT WHAT YOU CLAIM TO BE DOING. I TOLD YOU. I AGREED WITH THAT SHlT YOU WERE SAYING. ADP DECLINED.


DO YOU WANT IN OR NOT. YES OR NO. LAST CHANCE, FAT GIRL!

[Spoon23]

Do you agree Travestyny, to this set of parameters ADPO2 has brought up to your attention. This is to pave way for a more specific debate that will lead to a clearer debate for both parties.

I said NO to a VAGUE CHALLENGE . You know, just like you didn't want this CURRENT CHALLENGE to be VAGUE!!!

KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!


.

ADP02 SAYS NO to a vague debate. That is why he wants everything clear on the range of scope this debate is about. Like a clear debate. PARAMETERS ARE TO BE ESTABLISHED you nitwit. You need to agree to ADP02's parameters. You can add yours and I will ask ADP02 if it's alright with him


1. Judges will settle what was the scope.

Huh?? Are you fuvkn' dumb? The scope is defined from the start of the argument. You have to agree of the scope of the debate. What is the full scope. That's why I listed to you questions to agree on.

2. Initial statements not to be backed away from.

Initial statements that are quoted can be used to discredit opponent.

3. Use any additional information that you want.

Off course this is fine as long as it supports your scope. Irrelevant topics is a waste of time. That's why I gave you a list of the parameters of the scope, that you need to agree to get this show on the road.

4. Permanent ban

Perma Bann is given to the loser.

5. All points.

All points given to the winner.


SAY YES TO ALL THIS TRAVESTYNY AND WE CAN GO TO THE ACTUAL DEBATE PROPER.

so does it appear that travestyny is ok with the scope and exclusions that were agreed?


travesty are you okay with this??


yes or no

"can or does epo testing have threshold type criteria?"

exclusions: only 1. Scope is not about whether epo is a threshold substance.

Also,

t/e ratio screening test - i had even provided to you multiple times including where you agreed this point.

are you ok with that point too?

yes or no


initial statements, i had a "note" to state that there are more tests and procedures concerning how epo is tested than what i have stated thus far. I will discuss that too once we start this debate.

are you ok with that too?

yes or no



you provided your statement that you found no talk of a "threshold" for epo testing in wada documents.

are you ok with that too?

yes or no



you stated that you looked at epo technical documents and anything and everything mentioned was in scope and game?

are you ok with that too?


yes or no




.

If you agree to all this Travesty.

Then there is no more reason to delay this any longer, unless you want to flake off again. It's game time!! Put up or shut up biatch!

Say Yes to agree with this terms. Then we are ready for a debate. And will get this show on the road.


PUT UP OR SHUT UP BIATCH!!

[Spoon23]

I GIVE 2 SHlTS ABOUT WHAT YOU CLAIM TO BE DOING. I TOLD YOU. I AGREED WITH THAT SHlT YOU WERE SAYING. ADP DECLINED.


DO YOU WANT IN OR NOT. YES OR NO. LAST CHANCE, FAT GIRL!

lolololol

I am still in the process of making this debate clear for you guys who seem to be in a loop that never ends. Agree or Not?? I laid it out for you. Yes or NO.

You seem scared. It's pre fight scope. You seem rattled. You biatchin' out? You can't handle simple parameters??

You better be fair. We can't have a vague debate. This is a debate that has to be clear. No more grey area. Parameters have to be set. If you don't agree. Then I guess you're biatchin' out. It's okay we are used to your ducking ways hahaha!!


Define your position in a paragraph.

Opening Statements.
Witness Testimony and Cross-Examination. (judges can question anyone of you)
Closing Arguments.
Judge Deliberation and Verdict.

[travestyny]

lolololol

i am still in the process of making this debate clear.

You seem scared. It's pre fight scope. You seem rattled. You biatchin' out? You can't handle simple parameters??

You better be fair. We can't have a vague debate. This is a debate that has to be clear. No more grey area. Parameters have to be set. If you don't agree. Then i guess you're biatchin' out. It's okay we are used to you ducking ways hahaha!!


Define your position in a paragraph.

You're sinking. I said I agree with what you said. You seem to be pvssying out. This is your very last chance. Do you agree or not? These were your words, so let me remind you!!!!!

this is a new case. It's only the premise that is the same. All facts from the old kangaroo court is not admissible to court. You can present those facts again to the new judges, but is not accepted as truths. Only the new judges will decide if it is.

New judges will look at facts presented in a new light.

if it's out of scope then it is inadmissible duh??

don't forget the most important part that you agreed on travesty.

in that if there were "additional evidence" that can be used to show evidence that the athlete was using epo, it can be used.

any scope outside the topic is inadmissible if the new judges deem it to.

i accept.

Last chance. Will you take ADP's place or not????

[travestyny]

SPOON ALSO DECLINES.

Not me

IT'S A WRAP. BETTER LUCK NEXT TIME, BlTCHES.
ADP02, THE NEXT TIME I HEAR FROM YOU BETTER BE YOU SENDING ME THE POINTS THAT YOU OWE, BlTCH.

4-0!!!!!!

//krikya360.com/forums/s...d.php?t=740888

[img]//media.*****.com/media/3o7qDSOvfaCO9b3MlO/*****.gif[/IMG]

....but SPOON23 AND ADP02 STILL LIKE....

[Spoon23]

SPOON ALSO DECLINES.

IT'S A WRAP. BETTER LUCK NEXT TIME, BlTCHES.
ADP02, THE NEXT TIME I HEAR FROM YOU BETTER BE YOU SENDING ME THE POINTS THAT YOU OWE, BlTCH.

4-0!!!!!!

//krikya360.com/forums/s...d.php?t=740888

[img]//media.*****.com/media/3o7qDSOvfaCO9b3MlO/*****.gif[/IMG]

....but SPOON23 AND ADP02 STILL LIKE....

lolololol

My proposal is only a proposal you moron just because he declined means it's over you dumbass.

We haven't even decided on the judges and you are QUACKING ALREADY LMAO

Prefight stipulation is decided by both parties. You can't even get that. You are too ****** to be in any debate. Every time, I swear you get dumber hahaha!!


Anyway at least we already know who's a quack hahaha!!

[Spoon23]

I got what I needed to see.

ADP02. I hope you see that you have been debating with a clown.

You guys aren't even in the Jury selection part. And your opponent is baitchin' out again hahaha!

Pathetic.