11 Aug 14
Originally posted by Eladarthis is the point where i should get defensive and prove i always substantiate my arguments when in fact that burden is on you who made the accusation?
It seems that you have no problem when you talk out your ass, but I guess that just goes to prove your hypocrisy.
no thanks.
like i said, we know you are a moron, your opinions don't matter and you are not entitled to them.
11 Aug 14
Originally posted by ZahlanziYou substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?
this is the point where i should get defensive and prove i always substantiate my arguments when in fact that burden is on you who made the accusation?
no thanks.
like i said, we know you are a moron, your opinions don't matter and you are not entitled to them.
11 Aug 14
Originally posted by Eladar
You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?
You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?So the real test of merit is not what Zahlanzi argues, and not the quality of his sources, but only what Eladar believes. An argument that fails to convince Eladar is not a good enough argument after all.
There is no room in this scenario for Eladar ever to be wrong. He is the arbiter and judge and jury and authority on which we must rest all decisions.
11 Aug 14
1 edit
Originally posted by finnegan"...and not the quality of his sources"You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?So the real test of merit is not what Zahlanzi argues, and not the quality of his sources, but only what Eladar believes. An argument that fails to convince Eladar is not a good enough argument after all.
There is no room in this scenario for Eladar ev ...[text shortened]... wrong. He is the arbiter and judge and jury and authority on which we must rest all decisions.
Guffaw, it was an opinion piece on opinions.
11 Aug 14
Originally posted by finneganThe quality of anyone's source is what the other person believes. Only a hypocrite would believe otherwise.You substantiate your points, but do you do so with sources that I believe are credible?So the real test of merit is not what Zahlanzi argues, and not the quality of his sources, but only what Eladar believes. An argument that fails to convince Eladar is not a good enough argument after all.
There is no room in this scenario for Eladar ev ...[text shortened]... wrong. He is the arbiter and judge and jury and authority on which we must rest all decisions.
12 Aug 14
I can see the appeal of the article to the closet control freaks and not so closeted control freaks, aside from the issue of a public broadcaster futility struggling to be neutral, the other aspect is that Stokes is the chief censor in his classroom. This is what has tickled the fancy of zahlanzi and Finnegan, they got all glassy eyed with dreams of wielding that power.
12 Aug 14
Originally posted by Wajomai know you are a big fan of idiots opening their mouths to voice their opinions without thinking.
I can see the appeal of the article to the closet control freaks and not so closeted control freaks, aside from the issue of a public broadcaster futility struggling to be neutral, the other aspect is that Stokes is the chief censor in his classroom. This is what has tickled the fancy of zahlanzi and Finnegan, they got all glassy eyed with dreams of wielding that power.