This is a response to my good buddy Drift. Since he has banned me from commenting on his user page due to an inability to handle my flawless logic, I will post it here. Hopefully he will have the good fortune of reading it and gaining some sense of enlightenment from my words.

----------------------

Ah, Drift, your attempt at trying to emulate our intelligence is quite hilarious, if not outright deplorable. Stick to what you know : SRS BSNSS l337 sp34k. It suits you much better than typing words into an online thesaurus.

As far as me being TheElSalvador's alternate account, that is a reasonable assumption - if you're a moron. However, anyone with an ounce of intelligence or deductive reasoning would see that our writing styles, while employing a similar grasp of the English language, are entirely different.

However, all of that is beside the point. In an attempt to keep on topic, I will again rebut your arguments with a simple statement that you, my friend, are a no-talent assclone douchebag. I'm running out of ways to explain this to you in a way that your small, small brain could comprehend. It's an exercise in futility, no doubt, but an enjoyable exercise on my part.

The fact of the matter is that, as TheElSalvador has pointed out, no one has done what I have done with Flash. That would make me a truly unique individual in that sense. Therefore, my right to call you another Madness clone is entirely within reason. In all of the flashes you created and/or took part in, there is not one iota of creativity. That, as I have stated, makes you a talentless assclone.

For example, if I were to steal a stand-up comedian's joke and use a different voice when I told it, I'd still be stealing his joke. The delivery would be different, obviously, but I'd still have stolen the essential parts of the joke.

That is exactly what you do with Madness. You steal the essence, the core, of the animation and deliver it in a different fashion. You are no better than Dane Cook or Carlos Mencia - a bunch of no-talent assclown clones of their superiors.

Perhaps you can understand that analogy, and denying it in any fashion would prove worthless as it is, in your case, entirely true.

How's that for reasoning?