You tell em DM/BenjaminQuote:
Originally Posted by DM_Benjamin
Printable View
You tell em DM/BenjaminQuote:
Originally Posted by DM_Benjamin
You all (excluding ASF, despite his repetitiveness) are freaking terrible at arguing.
If you must keep this thread alive, learn how.
Seems like pyro taken over bb in the awar drama.
Do you have any links you'd recommend for learning to argue? And it's y'all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Yet you post in it contributing to it staying alive. What does that tell you about yourself?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Says the guy who thinks dousing dumb arguments in legalese somehow makes them better arguments (it doesnt).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
In fact, whenever you post, I'm consistently shocked to know you're a lawyer irl. asf's 'repetitiveness' that you point out as the exception to bad arguing is actually well known as a BAD way to argue (argumentum ad nauseam). It doesnt mean his claims are wrong (they are in fact right!). But you will almost never get someone to concede anything in an argument/debate by repeating the same thing over and over. (Your poor clients...)
If you have to repeat one thing over and over again cause you got nothing else it usually means you are wrong though. But obviously you are biased and lack the ability to see things more clearly. What is also funny is that you think these kind of things are representative for "IRL"Quote:
Originally Posted by Felonious
But its nice throwing in fancy terms and latin sayins for the pesudo intellectual look. :)
impeccable choice Palem
http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...1#post15342032Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
Will you ban yourself? Or does Bishop have to do it?
I could point out 3 things wrong with that statement. But, meh, you're always in every thread tryin to pick an argument with anyone you can on both sides of any issue. And, frankly, I'm not that bored. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Korp
"Im not that bored but i painstalkingly check the forum so i can make lame jokes about Pyro every chance I get" Also, usually when people claim they have something they usually have ****. If you actually werent that bored, you wouldnt reply to my post at all. :))Quote:
Originally Posted by Felonious
Says the lady who can only argue based on ignoring what people post, i.e. "I started to read what you wrote but then I tuned out...." (or many similar such statements) and then attempts to pick apart an argument by complaining that words that have been used are "too big" (despite them having been defined and referenced for the convenience of the reader.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Felonious
/me shrugs.
If you lack the patience, respect and education to argue, don't.
Apparently pyro send sheister one day and bombdigie the next day to the forums to defend their foul play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Felonious
Lampost,
You are misplacing arguments over and over.
No one is defending the multi from last age, beyond personal defenses of individual members who claim honestly that they had no knowledge of the multi until it occurred.
If you are referring to the double on emeriti of this age, that is the allegation in dispute and remained in dispute through the entire thread. Disputing an allegation is not a defense of foul play.
To argue clearly, you need to be able to separate fact from allegation and correctly identify the parts of an argument and what references to what actions. You conflate so many issues that every post you make is just a rambling and disorganized rant which makes no sense. I am always up for a well reasoned argument. They are fun. What you are doing is just not that. At various points in this thread I have tried to gently give you guidance and feedback to improve your argument. Your point, as best I can understand it, has some merit on one of the tangential issues (though no the central issue) in this thread. If you would just focus a little, your posts would be so much more effective and useful.
Moreover, the desire by you and your compatriots to ignore the conclusively established fact pattern that supports the conspiracy offense without any regard to defenses to the conspiracy claim or presentation of any mitigation of the conspiracy claim and instead choosing to flail away at bomdiggie who is (at best) a convenient lighting rod who has not made many (if any) relevant points is just another symptom of your lack of focus and skill in argumentation.
Finally, the subject of this thread was resolved by victory in the battlefield. The issues having been determined via conflict, your arguments and continued assertions are moot.
Now please, let this thread die. Stop the personal attacks. Save it for a thread that is relevant to something that is current in the game. This issue is in the past and gone.