The art of debating

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



The Omega

botankus
Actually, though I agree with about 10% of what she says, The Omega is one of the most pleasant debators to go up against. She does not resort to name-calling, and doesn't act like the world is going to blow up if she doesn't get in the last vulgar insult. It's a genuine priviledge to debate with The Omega.

Only problem, she doesn't use the quote function and instead puts your name and a couple of arrows, so you had better remember what you said or be prepared to scroll through the entire thread!

The Omega
Why, thank you.
(That's just because I'm yet to figure out how to quote more than one person in a reply... Is there a magic way of doing that???) happy

PVS
pay attention whob

botankus
Originally posted by The Omega
Why, thank you.
(That's just because I'm yet to figure out how to quote more than one person in a reply... Is there a magic way of doing that???) happy
I just click on each "Quote Reply" and then cut and paste them all on a Microsoft Word file and comment underneath each one of them. When I'm finished, I cut and paste the whole thing into the reply section.

Bardock42
Originally posted by The Omega
Why, thank you.
(That's just because I'm yet to figure out how to quote more than one person in a reply... Is there a magic way of doing that???) happy

No that is pretty easy...you can either use the "quickquote" button or you make the quotes yourself by originally posted by The Omega*text* just without the spaces....or you can open the quotes in a new window and copy past them....whichever one prefers.....just saying the name and using an arrow is cooler though....

Ya Krunk'd Floo
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Bardock> I don't agree. It's better if everyone conforms.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo


I beg to differ....non-comformists are cool...I am even so non-conformist that I won't even subscribe to the conformity of using arrows which seemingly you and The Omega do...score for me....

Now that beats it all....

Ya Krunk'd Floo

Bardock42
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo


Yes, you did...you did....I am proud of you....but...I can just copy paste what you said in the quote and no one will ever notice.....I won't though....because I understand that it is very important for you to think you have made me look like a fool....

Ya Krunk'd Floo
Thanks. I did though, didn't I?

(That was rhetorical)

Bardock42
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Thanks. I did though, didn't I?

(That was rhetorical)

Hmm, yeah I figured...although one of the few times where a rhetorical question implies a negative answer....sweet....

Ya Krunk'd Floo
Oh, no! Bardock! I've made you look like a fool again, although this time it's unintentional! Using 'didn't I' as a tag-question implies a positive answer! If I had said: "I didn't though, did I?", then it would have implied a negative answer.

Enough.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Oh, no! Bardock! I've made you look like a fool again, although this time it's unintentional! Using 'didn't I' as a tag-question implies a positive answer! If I had said: "I didn't though, did I?", then it would have implied a negative answer.

Enough.

Yes, that'S why it'S one of those rare cases......damn you....

Ya Krunk'd Floo
Love me?

PVS
why dont you two just get it over with and f***?

Ya Krunk'd Floo
Ooo, "the green eyed monster doth mock the meat it feeds on!".

Bardock42
Originally posted by PVS
why dont you two just get it over with and f***?

Never heard of foreplay...you are so unromantic....

Ya Krunk'd Floo
Sweet talk him, honey!

Alpha Centauri
There is no art of debating unless you're in a sanctioned debate.

The key on THIS forum is to know what you're talking about and have the ability to make and understand points. Hence why most of them go to shit.

-AC

Ya Krunk'd Floo
Yeah, everyone here is a bunch of dicks. Bardock alone is like 5 dicks. You're about 6. Doom is 3 and a half.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Yeah, everyone here is a bunch of dicks. Bardock alone is like 5 dicks. You're about 6. Doom is 3 and a half.

What the hell...why am I less dicks than AC?

debbiejo
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, you did...you did....I am proud of you....but...I can just copy paste what you said in the quote and no one will ever notice.....I won't though....because I understand that it is very important for you to think you have made me look like a fool.... It's not hard is it?? laughing out loud stick out tongue



Maybe I shouldn't of used the word hard.......oh, sorry.

Bardock42
Originally posted by debbiejo
It's not hard is it?? laughing out loud stick out tongue



Maybe I shouldn't of used the word hard.......oh, sorry.

...

Janus Marius
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
There is no art of debating unless you're in a sanctioned debate.

The key on THIS forum is to know what you're talking about and have the ability to make and understand points. Hence why most of them go to shit.

-AC

This is true.

Mindship
Would not the "art" of debating on KMC include conducting oneself in a civilized, respectful manner? This way, debates do not become fecalized via flurries of name-calling and other forms of non-germane self-expression.

Quiero Mota

Bardock42
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Why? It's pointless and achieves nothing.

What do you base that on. And what do you recommend instead? Shooting each other?

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by Bardock42
What do you base that on. And what do you recommend instead? Shooting each other?

I only argue when I have an incentive. On KMC no one ever agrees and it gets no where.

Shooting is a bit extreme. I recommend just waving your gun, or lifting your shirt just enough to show that you're packin' so the puto gets your point. comprende?

Alpha Centauri
It's not pointless, and one could argue whether the point was to achieve anything anyway.

If anything it gives people involved and/or people watching a better understanding of the issue at hand, or the views included.

Many people agree here. Not too sure where you got this "No one ever agrees" part.

-AC

Quiero Mota
How does some one watching get a better understanding of the issue at hand when you dish out insults and never admit to being wrong?

The people who DON'T agree get no where, and the conversation just stagnates.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
How does some one watching get a better understanding of the issue at hand when you dish out insults and never admit to being wrong?

The people who DON'T agree get no where, and the conversation just stagnates.

I can't agree that the majority of the GDF debates are just insults....that seems to be a rather silly claim....

mechmoggy
Has anyone used the master-debator line yet?

whistle

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
How does some one watching get a better understanding of the issue at hand when you dish out insults and never admit to being wrong?

The people who DON'T agree get no where, and the conversation just stagnates.

What Bardock said, there's a difference between a heated discussion and a flame war.

It only degenerates into a purposeful flame war that is FULL of insults (as opposed to the odd word, which everyone does) when people realise that they can't actually debate.

Eg: Abortion thread. That's when the conversation stagnates, when people are too stupid to understand simple points and keep rehashing it, resultantly- the thread always had to go back to a certain place.

Stupid people are the problem, yes. There, seems to be this "Everyone can debate" logic on KMC. Everyone has the RIGHT to, yes. Whether their contributions will be detrimental to the thread or not relies on their ability to debate properly. Debbiejo always drags things off topic. There's a connection.

-AC

WrathfulDwarf
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Why? It's pointless and achieves nothing.

QT hit the nail with that comment....it's only a forum guys. Why make a big huge deal out of it? We have discussions, we might agree or not agree, and we move on....simple. It's just like life we do thing and move on.

AC if you consider stupid people to be the problem. Wouldn't you consider people who think they smart an even bigger problem?

Bardock42
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
QT hit the nail with that comment....it's only a forum guys. Why make a big huge deal out of it? We have discussions, we might agree or not agree, and we move on....simple. It's just like life we do thing and move on.

AC if you consider stupid people to be the problem. Wouldn't you consider people who think they smart an even bigger problem?

People that only think they are smart are in fact stupid and therefore part of the "stupid people" he referred to.

WrathfulDwarf
Originally posted by Bardock42
People that only think they are smart are in fact stupid and therefore part of the "stupid people" he referred to.

Believe me some "stupid people" come from both sides of the fence. Even worse when they have supporters rally around them.

Bardock42
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Believe me some "stupid people" come from both sides of the fence. Even worse when they have supporters rally around them.

What...where...what....WHAT?

What fence?

If we are talking about the fence between stupid people and smart people then I can gladly say that stupid people only come from one side of the fence.....

WrathfulDwarf
No, not that fence...I'm talking about the fence on both sides of an issue. Come on bardock. But in the end you choose your side. Suit yourself my friend.

Bardock42
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
No, not that fence...I'm talking about the fence on both sides of an issue. Come on bardock. But in the end you choose your side. Suit yourself my friend.

Yes, but no one is denying that...obviously there are idiots with any kind of opinion (although I'd say that some opinions might have a better share of idiots than others) ...

PVS
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
QT hit the nail with that comment....it's only a forum guys. Why make a big huge deal out of it?

so...this has turned into a debate on the validity of forum debate...


...yourself and QT argue a point that debating is pointless and nobody ever agrees...


...so i must ask: why did you waste your energy in typing that?

WrathfulDwarf
As you can see I was addressing QT and not you. Then I ask a question and Bardock answer it. If I was really wasting energy then I would argue with you.

PVS
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
As you can see I was addressing QT and not you. Then I ask a question and Bardock answer it. If I was really wasting energy then I would argue with you.

...but you are eek!

and btw you addressed QT in the third person, so no it was not addressed to QT alone. nice try. but then you go on to say "it's only a forum guys." which by your last statement denying any address toward myself would imply that you're calling me a woman...is that flaming? stick out tongue

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
QT hit the nail with that comment....it's only a forum guys. Why make a big huge deal out of it? We have discussions, we might agree or not agree, and we move on....simple. It's just like life we do thing and move on.

AC if you consider stupid people to be the problem. Wouldn't you consider people who think they smart an even bigger problem?

That first paragraph is odd. Yes we have discussions and agree/disagree and move on. What exactly is the point you're making? Once a debate/discussion is over, I move on. Sometimes even if it's still going on. As long as I've personally got something to say, I'll say it. Nowadays I've started taking anything that gets personal, to PMs. On topic, though, I say what I say until I'm done saying it. There are people, for example in the abortion thread, who can't (or won't) grasp the simplest of points.

It's not a matter of me wanting them to agree even, it's the fact that they genuinely can't grasp a point and as a result of them insisting to be part of the debate (it's their "right" of course), constantly drag it back to square one.

Also, I wouldn't say a bigger problem, I'd say as much a part of it.

-AC

debbiejo
It's not nice to talk about people behind their backs.......flower_girl

Besides somethings aren't worth arguing about........I just won one with Bardock in the RF though.........EVERYTHING IS MADE OF ENERGY!!!

PVS
Originally posted by debbiejo
It's not nice to talk about people behind their backs.......flower_girl

Besides somethings aren't worth arguing about........I just won one with Bardock in the RF though.........EVERYTHING IS MADE OF ENERGY!!!

but thats just it...the problem. you didnt WIN. you helped someone to see your point, and accept it. it doesnt mean you validated the point a.k.a. "won". winning is impossible. im sure you know that, but many here just dont. and that imho is "the problem"

Bardock42
Originally posted by debbiejo
It's not nice to talk about people behind their backs.......flower_girl

Besides somethings aren't worth arguing about........I just won one with Bardock in the RF though.........EVERYTHING IS MADE OF ENERGY!!!

No, that's still wrong....energy is a property not matter....

PVS
ms. alternative topic strikes again ninja

Bardock42
Originally posted by PVS
but thats just it...the problem. you didnt WIN. you helped someone to see your point, and accept it. it doesnt mean you validated the point a.k.a. "won". winning is impossible. im sure you know that, but many here just dont. and that imho is "the problem"

Yeah, not only that-...also, she's still wrong.....but she will never see it....she'S debbie...she's special....

debbiejo
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, that's still wrong....energy is a property not matter.... Everything being made of energy IS A FACT!!....A Scientific Fact...

Originally posted by Bardock42
...she'S debbie...she's special.... Well, you got this part right.. wink
Originally posted by PVS
ms. alternative topic strikes again ninja

Yeah, I miss you too...kiss4

Bardock42
Originally posted by debbiejo
Everything being made of energy IS A FACT!!....A Scientific Fact...

Well, you got this part right.. wink

No..how...no...just...no...

Soleran
Well this one time I was chewing gum and I said I should post on here because this gum is good. No one ever really "wins" an argument as PVS stated even if you think you do, you don't.

debbiejo
Originally posted by Soleran
Well this one time I was chewing gum and I said I should post on here because this gum is good. No one ever really "wins" an argument as PVS stated even if you think you do, you don't. laughing out loud My cafe lattes good, that's why I posted........

OH........I'm only deluding myself........ confused

Alpha Centauri
AC's point is proven.

-AC

Eis
Originally posted by debbiejo
laughing out loud My cafe lattes good, that's why I posted........

OH........I'm only deluding myself........ confused
Debbie if your point is to make chit-chat please go to the right forum, maybe in "your world" it's fine and maybe even fun to go off-topic on threads but there are rules.
So refrain yourself to post in these threads if you've got nothing to say about the original topic.

debbiejo
Originally posted by Eis
Debbie if your point is to make chit-chat please go to the right forum, maybe in "your world" it's fine and maybe even fun to go off-topic on threads but there are rules.
So refrain yourself to post in these threads if you've got nothing to say about the original topic. I certainly did comply with the topic......I said "I'm I only deluding myself"..Which was agreeing with Soleran who agreed with PVS.........Maybe you need to take a closer look........

Bardock42
I think Debbie actually was right. I feel so bad inside now. God ....is that Bizarro world or something.

Eis
Originally posted by debbiejo
I certainly did comply with the topic......I said "I'm I only deluding myself"..Which was agreeing with Soleran who agreed with PVS.........Maybe you need to take a closer look........
I did take a close look. And in the first post you dragged a conversation that had nothing to do with the original topic.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think Debbie actually was right. I feel so bad inside now. God ....is that Bizarro world or something.
Marius, what the hell? I'm trying to tell Debbie to stop going off topic here! STFU. stick out tongue

debbiejo
laughing out loud

BackFire
Wonderful, now we're going to have even more people copying/pasting logic fallacies in threads without saying anything of value or interest to back it up.

Victor Von Doom
Surely if constructing the edifice of skilled debate upon logical fallacies, the thread should be called 'The science of debating'.

YKD- I'm actually 2 dicks. 1.3 in horse years.

The Omega
BF> Ah, you have to bear with me... Picking out logic fallacies in an argument can be quite educating AND entertaining. happy

BackFire
It can be if it's followed by something worth reading, otherwise it's just a redundant exercise in copying/pasting shit from other sites. I've never been educated or entertained by someone who just says "you've committed the logical fallacy of argumentum imadumbass because blah blah blah - This website is dedicated to the broadening of our readers logical powers and...oops, didn't mean to copy that last part from the website that I found on google by typing in 'logical fallacy'".

Granted I've never seen you do something like this, Omega, but I do see it and it becomes a shit stain in every thread in which it happens, IMO.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by BackFire
"you've committed the logical fallacy of argumentum imadumbass because blah blah blah -

Good stuff.

BackFire

Janus Marius
Originally posted by BackFire
This actually sounds like fun. I'll throw in a practice exercise that's pretty easy for people to do.

What logical fallacy does the following argument commit (you actually hear this argument pretty often).

"IF YOU ALLOW GAY MARRIAGE THAN NEXT WE WILL ALLOW PEOPLE TO MARRY ANIMALS AND TREES AND TOASTERS AND CHILDREN AND CHAIRS AND WAFFLES, THUS WE CAN'T ALLOW GAY MARRIAGE!!!!!" (Posted in caps for the sake of parody).

Okay, Go!

Argumentum Whatteh****ius, one fallacy.

Inspectah Deck

crazylozer
http://www.shortpacked.com/d/20060405.html

= pure truth.

The Omega
Originally posted by BackFire
"IF YOU ALLOW GAY MARRIAGE THAN NEXT WE WILL ALLOW PEOPLE TO MARRY ANIMALS AND TREES AND TOASTERS AND CHILDREN AND CHAIRS AND WAFFLES, THUS WE CAN'T ALLOW GAY MARRIAGE!!!!!" (Posted in caps for the sake of parody).

Okay, Go!


Coool, a challenge... happy
Well, first there's ad hoc. There is no proof to suggest that allowing gay marriage will lead to the allowance of people marrying their pets and kitchen utensils.

It also contains Audiatur et altera pars, namely the non-stated assumption that gay marraiges are BAD. There's the "slippery slope argument". (and indirectly the fallacy Argumentum ad nauseam. This is the incorrect belief that an assertion is more likely to be true, or is more likely to be accepted as true, the more often it is heard.)

happy

PVS
ok, i have a REAL challenge.
construct an argument containing EVERY logical fallacy listed.
winner gets....nothing

BackFire
Originally posted by PVS
ok, i have a REAL challenge.
construct an argument containing EVERY logical fallacy listed.
winner gets....nothing

That's easy, just watch an episode of The O'Reilly Factor.

PVS
yeah, he has a gift

KharmaDog
O.K., could someone clear a debating order of procedure for me?

At what point is it acceptable (or necessary) for one supposed to declare victory and post smilies and "owned" pics in a debate?

Janus Marius
Smilies are the mark of the beast. They should be banned.

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by KharmaDog
O.K., could someone clear a debating order of procedure for me?

At what point is it acceptable (or necessary) for one supposed to declare victory and post smilies and "owned" pics in a debate?

Never.

I'm not saying smilies shouldn't ever be used on a messageboard, but some posters (Whirly, Whob) use them to mask the fact that they're probably sitting there punching themselves in the face with frustration.

-AC

Janus Marius
Here, I'll show you the true art of debate. Let me know if you've seen this before.

"Intelligent Design is a scientific theory because a bunch of false analogies, bad researchers say so at the following links:

www.tehbibulpwnzj00.org

www.thetruthisinthebible.net

and www.godishereiswearit.gov

Btw, any time you address my argument I will give you a witty misdirection! lol

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/2586/edgarallanpwned4qe.jpg Happy Dance laughing smokin'

FIN"

Alpha Centauri
To quote (to the best of my memory) Ricky Gervais:

"Christians believe Darwin was wrong and God created us and everything else. Why? It says so in the bible. 'And God created the Heaven and the Earth.' We don't have much more proof beyond 'I did it, trust me. It was me.' on his end. God avoids the details."

-AC

docb77
You know what's really funny about the website link in the first post? You read through all these logical fallacies, and then when you read the atheist arguments (Pro-God argument deconstructions?) They're full of the fallacies you just read about!

I bet that all of us have used a logical fallacy (probably more than one) at some point or another. Especially the straw man fallacy. Whob is a straw man so often.... what's a semi-intelligent guy supposed to do if he actually find's himself agreeing with the guy?

debbiejo
Originally posted by KharmaDog
O.K., could someone clear a debating order of procedure for me?

At what point is it acceptable (or necessary) for one supposed to declare victory and post smilies and "owned" pics in a debate? You mean Like I did yesterday???? roll eyes (sarcastic) embarrasment

Ya Krunk'd Floo
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm not saying smilies shouldn't ever be used on a messageboard, but some posters (Whirly, Whob) use them to mask the fact that they're probably sitting there punching themselves in the face with frustration.

Oh, I like that image. Part of its beauty is that it's so easy to imagine. Every time Whirly got into an argument, he'd start disappearing down the drain, then after a few back-and-forths out would come the simileys attached to the end of each pathetic 'rebuttal'. Good memories. So sad he's gone.

Whirly, if you're reading this as you masturbate...Hi! Hi you! Hi!

debbiejo
Why did he get banned?

Ya Krunk'd Floo
My guess is that it was because he's a dullard.

Bardock42
Repeatedly trolling I believe....

debbiejo
Well I like reading the different debate of some people, though some of them can get alittle redundant.

-AC


roll eyes (sarcastic)

PVS
he was the 'jekyll and hyde' poster.
someone not familiar with him might actually mistake him
for a gentleman.

The Omega
Originally posted by PVS
ok, i have a REAL challenge.
construct an argument containing EVERY logical fallacy listed.
winner gets....nothing

There are a couple of posters around here who'll righ for winning already. big grin

Originally posted by KharmaDog
O.K., could someone clear a debating order of procedure for me?

At what point is it acceptable (or necessary) for one supposed to declare victory and post smilies and "owned" pics in a debate?

I suppose you have to wait for your opponent to concede to your points before you can be declared "winner."
The thing is, before even starting a debate,, you need to lay down the foundation of premises. This is rarely done here. Some people debate on the premises that the Bible is true, for example, without ever offering proof.

docb77> You can agree with your opponents on various topics. That doesn't mean you agree with them on everything. It's not EITHER OR. And sure, we all fall in the pit of logic fallacies once in a while... EVERYONE KNOWS THAT!... <- one smile

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by debbiejo
Well I like reading the different debate of some people, though some of them can get alittle redundant.

-AC


roll eyes (sarcastic)

How funny. Ms. A.D.D poster girl accusing someone else of being redundant.

I've been here with my attitude for the best part of a year longer than you and not nearly as many people have displayed such rampant annoyance for me as they have for you.

You belong in the OTF.

-AC

GCG
The Art of Debating.

Rule #1: You can only get better, by debating a tougher opponent.

Tha C-Master
Some people like Creshosk have had loads of formal debating training, which can make them frustrating to go against, but when they supply little concrete details and facts, its usually little else but frustration.

Janus Marius
It's hardly a debate if one side is going by certain rules (Arguing objectively, providing evidence, not slipping up with numerous fallacies, and so on) and the other is arguing like a fool.

Apparently a lot of people are under the mass delusion that just having an opinion and asserting it is somehow debating.

Inspectah Deck
Originally posted by debbiejo
Why did he get banned?

He got banned for extensive use of Google. stick out tongue

PVS
Originally posted by Janus Marius
It's hardly a debate if one side is going by certain rules (Arguing objectively, providing evidence, not slipping up with numerous fallacies, and so on) and the other is arguing like a fool.

Apparently a lot of people are under the mass delusion that just having an opinion and asserting it is somehow debating.

ZOMG YOU'RE WRONG!!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!! LOL!!!! ROFLZ!!!!!!

laughing out loud roll eyes (sarcastic) laughing laughing laughing

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/PVS/fubar.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/PVS/LOLMouth.jpg




-FIN

Janus Marius
zOMGs!!!11

PVS pulled a Whob.

PVS
thank you, oh zen master of the obvious stick out tongue

Alpha Centauri
To add to the list; the sarcastic and "comedic" use of leet is becoming worse than insecure use of smilies, fast.

-AC

PVS
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
To add to the list; the sarcastic and "comedic" use of leet is becoming worse than insecure use of smilies, fast.

-AC

ZOMG YOU"RE SO RIGHT AC!!!!11111111ONEONEELEVEN

Janus Marius
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
To add to the list; the sarcastic and "comedic" use of leet is becoming worse than insecure use of smilies, fast.

-AC

i git teh felling taht ac dudnt liek teh 13373r speake lol wtf bbqq!!!111


...

Of course, there is the distinct possiblity that I don't do that to be funny, but that I actually suffer a temporal lobe seizure and spasm all over my keyboard.

Alpha Centauri
Hahaha, you rascals.

To add to my previous claim: It's less acceptable to then adopt the "Oh I'll be a right ol' card and do exactly what he claimed was immature and not funny, just to be funny." mentality.

For the record, I do appreciate that you speak leet to achieve some kind of over-emphasis and it's not serious, that it's meant in humour, I get it. It's just not funny and is becoming worse than original leetspeakers by the second.

Your choice as to what path you take smile<---Smiley.

-AC

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Hahaha, you rascals.

To add to my previous claim: It's less acceptable to then adopt the "Oh I'll be a right ol' card and do exactly what he claimed was immature and not funny, just to be funny." mentality.

For the record, I do appreciate that you speak leet to achieve some kind of over-emphasis and it's not serious, that it's meant in humour, I get it. It's just not funny and is becoming worse than original leetspeakers by the second.

Your choice as to what path you take smile<---Smiley.

-AC

Damn, I feel good now that I didn't post any "leet"....and God know I was tempted to do....

Alpha Centauri
It's probably been funny once, ever. It never will be again and any chance it had to be resurrected as funny were killed off when everyone decided to start thinking "It'll be funny if I say it too."

If people want to use it, fine by me. I just find it odd that those same people are poking fun at the conduct of others.

-AC

Capt_Fantastic
What does leet mean?

Bardock42
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
What does leet mean?

Some sort of code in which you use symbols and numbers instead of words, the word "leet" itself comes from "elite"...which the people using it nowadays think they are. "leet" for example would be spelled as "1337", but it might be even crazier like ""win" as "\/\/1/\/". Originally it'S supposed to have been a useful Hacker language against codebreaking or whatever...who knows....ask Urban Dictionary for further information. Also, it's stupid ...

The Omega

Janus Marius

docb77

The Omega

WrathfulDwarf
Originally posted by docb77
I've left arguments like that before. Only real problem is that you're leaving your opponent in his/her self imposed ignorance.

See, this is what I just don't agree with...in a discussion there are people having two sides (or maybe more sides) of an issue. You can't really say that whatever you think is a truth and the other person is ignorant. That's just assuming too much about yourself. If you claim to be as open minded as you said (not necessarily you I'm just generalizing) then you wouldn't treat the other person as ignorant. Not everyone has all the facts and no one is perfect. In a discussion I don't see opponents or ignorant people....I just see people.

Janus Marius
That's true a lot of times. However, sometimes people are clearly ignorant, yet taking a stance anyways. If you clearly know more than they do, they're ignorant. That's not a negative labelling; it's the way it is.

Lana
And if you are presenting clear facts and they're doing the "lalalala not listening" act...then it's not only them being ignorant, but willfully so, which to me is far worse than simply not knowing something.

Janus Marius
Exactly. Ignorance is forgivable. Willful ignorance is not.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Janus Marius
Exactly. Ignorance is forgivable. Willful ignorance is not.

Willfull ignorance also seems like a contradiction in terms.

Janus Marius
Not if you've seen it in action.

docb77
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
See, this is what I just don't agree with...in a discussion there are people having two sides (or maybe more sides) of an issue. You can't really say that whatever you think is a truth and the other person is ignorant. That's just assuming too much about yourself. If you claim to be as open minded as you said (not necessarily you I'm just generalizing) then you wouldn't treat the other person as ignorant. Not everyone has all the facts and no one is perfect. In a discussion I don't see opponents or ignorant people....I just see people.

It's not so much whether or not the other person agrees with me or not. I would however, appreciate it if they would at least try to see my POV. I think it's important to see all sides of the issue.

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by docb77
I think it's important to see all sides of the issue.

I couldn't agree more.

Bardock42
Originally posted by docb77
I think it's important to see all sides of the issue.

Yes, but it is also important to abandon the wrong POV once you have seen it.

The Omega

docb77
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, but it is also important to abandon the wrong POV once you have seen it.

True, true. thumbup1

WrathfulDwarf

PVS
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Hahaha, you rascals.

To add to my previous claim: It's less acceptable to then adopt the "Oh I'll be a right ol' card and do exactly what he claimed was immature and not funny, just to be funny." mentality.

For the record, I do appreciate that you speak leet to achieve some kind of over-emphasis and it's not serious, that it's meant in humour, I get it. It's just not funny and is becoming worse than original leetspeakers by the second.

Your choice as to what path you take smile<---Smiley.

-AC

well, surely its not funny if you say so, being the spokesman for the entire online community that is, as well as all knowing omnipotent god.

Janus Marius

Bardock42
Originally posted by PVS
well, surely its not funny if you say so, being the spokesman for the entire online community that is, as well as all knowing omnipotent god.

Hmm, well his joke about people doing it certainly surpassed the actual thing so....he gets my vote....

Lana
Originally posted by PVS
well, surely its not funny if you say so, being the spokesman for the entire online community that is, as well as all knowing omnipotent god.

I agree with him though...it's one of those things that's only funny if it's used sparingly. It's been so overused though, that it's just become as annoying as the people who seriously type like that.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Yeah, DB has this amazing ability to just... not get it.

There are a great many people who are like that, sadly.

PVS
edit *oops*

PVS
Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, well his joke about people doing it certainly surpassed the actual thing so....he gets my vote....

Originally posted by Lana
I agree with him though...it's one of those things that's only funny if it's used sparingly. It's been so overused though, that it's just become as annoying as the people who seriously type like that.



There are a great many people who are like that, sadly.

you agree that its worse for this forum than the whob/whirley smilie tactic? because thats what he said.

it doesnt kill a topic. the excessive and desperate use of smilies posted over and over, flooding a thread after a long tiring debate, kills a topic.

please dont forsake logic just for the pleasure of contradiction.

Lana
Where did I say it killed a topic? I'm just saying that it's so overused that there's not a single shred of amusement left in it anymore.

PVS
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
To add to the list; the sarcastic and "comedic" use of leet is becoming worse than insecure use of smilies, fast.

-AC

thats what i was addressing, and which you agreed to.
thats all im saying. smilies have proven destructive to a topic.
but i dont care, just pointing it out.

btw, im not gonna stop doing it. LOLZ!!!!11111ONEONE

Happy Dance *looks around for approval* Happy Dance

The Omega

Lana
Originally posted by PVS
thats what i was addressing, and which you agreed to.
thats all im saying. smilies have proven destructive to a topic.

I took what he said to mean in a sense of it being just as annoying. Which I believe it certainly has become.

Bardock42
Originally posted by PVS
you agree that its worse for this forum than the whob/whirley smilie tactic? because thats what he said.

it doesnt kill a topic. the excessive and desperate use of smilies posted over and over, flooding a thread after a long tiring debate, kills a topic.

please dont forsake logic just for the pleasure of contradiction.

Nope, I didn't say that3, I said that I support him solely because his joke was better than yours...I'm shallow as that, sue me...then again seems 40% of your fellow countrymen are as well....

Originally posted by PVS
thats what i was addressing, and which you agreed to.
thats all im saying. smilies have proven destructive to a topic.
but i dont care, just pointing it out.

btw, im not gonna stop doing it. LOLZ!!!!11111ONEONE

Happy Dance *looks around for approval* Happy Dance

Also, I think that "worse" was a personal judgment of how it is perceived by AC. Whirly's Smilies certainly were annoying, but one could also claim that the usage of leet for sarcastic purposes can be even worse.

Janus Marius
I wonder if AC separates leet from AOLese?

In any case, who cares?

PVS
Originally posted by Janus Marius
In any case, who cares?

good question

Bardock42
Originally posted by Janus Marius
I wonder if AC separates leet from AOLese?

In any case, who cares? Originally posted by PVS
good question

If I was forced to answer I'd probably say you two, Lana and I...maybe AC.....and the Moderators if we keep the OT up....

WrathfulDwarf

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by PVS
well, surely its not funny if you say so, being the spokesman for the entire online community that is, as well as all knowing omnipotent god.

A) Never have I ever called myself a god at any point. You remain the only one out of both of us who has referred to me as such.

Originally posted by PVS
you agree that its worse for this forum than the whob/whirley smilie tactic? because thats what he said.

it doesnt kill a topic. the excessive and desperate use of smilies posted over and over, flooding a thread after a long tiring debate, kills a topic.

please dont forsake logic just for the pleasure of contradiction.

B) I said that it is worse for this forum?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
To add to the list; the sarcastic and "comedic" use of leet is becoming worse than insecure use of smilies, fast.

-AC

I said it's becoming worse than the insecure use of smilies, fast. I never stated why it was becoming worse or what effect it has.

In about 5 minutes of scanning those posts I've managed to chalk you up on one count of wilful ignorance (ongoing) and one of (I'll assume) unintentional ignorance or misunderstanding on your part. Maybe you should change your name to I. Rony Hubbard.

To add to my list of why debating here leads to complications: People see what they want to see, if at a subconscious level.

-AC

WrathfulDwarf
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri



I said it's becoming worse than the insecure use of smilies, fast. I never stated why it was becoming worse or what effect it has.

I'll chalk that up to unintentional ignorance on your part, deny your mistake further and it will become wilful! wink <---Smiley use.

-AC

AC you're totally wrong! Happy Dance

is not ignorance rolling on floor laughing

people can use smilies as much as they want in a discussion sad embarrasment laughing



no expression

Alpha Centauri
I actually did believe that was Whirly for a split second.

That was identical to how he'd post, more or less.

-AC

WrathfulDwarf
I get those folks every now and then. Wanna see a good example? If you're interested pm me.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I actually did believe that was Whirly for a split second.

That was identical to how he'd post, more or less.

-AC

No smile

Whirly (weird) would mostly use the original form of the Smiley smile

Sometimes twice in a row smile smile

And when he was really talking Bullshit end with a nice wink wink

PVS
you were following the conversation AC. first people including myself brought up whob's and whirley's thread killing via smilies and other spamtastic bullshit when they knew they got owned.

then you switched the topic as a cute jab at me, which i really dont mind btw, since what you, lana, and bardock find funny means little to me. no offense intended but thats the truth.

the fact is that you connected one stated point to your point. that was the intention. but i guess when the statement is taken alone you can fake it and say you never made that connection, and i'll give it to you. smile <----see?

btw, the most annoying posting method is the constant use of 'no expression' especially when distributed throughout a post as some way to prove........well....prove what? thats they are not laughin or crying?smiling nor frowning? just sitting there typing with a straight face? well, most of us do that most of the time, so what is there to prove?

Janus Marius
Originally posted by PVS
you were following the conversation AC. first people including myself brought up whob's and whirley's thread killing via smilies and other spamtastic bullshit when they knew they got owned.

then you switched the topic as a cute jab at me, which i really dont mind btw, since what you, lana, and bardock find funny means little to me. no offense intended but thats the truth.

the fact is that you connected one stated point to your point. that was the intention. but i guess when the statement is taken alone you can fake it and say you never made that connection, and i'll give it to you. smile <----see?

btw, the most annoying posting method is the constant use of 'no expression' especially when distributed throughout a post as some way to prove........well....prove what? thats they are not laughin or crying?smiling nor frowning? just sitting there typing with a straight face? well, most of us do that most of the time, so what is there to prove?

Yeah, I absolutely hate those straight face smilies.

Alpha Centauri
Today I'll show examples of wilful ignorance and hypocricy from KMC's PVS:

Originally posted by PVS
you were following the conversation AC. first people including myself brought up whob's and whirley's thread killing via smilies and other spamtastic bullshit when they knew they got owned.

Right.

Originally posted by PVS
then you switched the topic as a cute jab at me, which i really dont mind btw, since what you, lana, and bardock find funny means little to me. no offense intended but thats the truth.

It wasn't a jab at you, wilful ignorance number one. Everytime I make a point that INCLUDES you, you automatically assume I am zooming in at your chest with laser sight or something. Janus clearly realised I was speaking about all those who use leetspeak in such a way. Why can't you? Oh that'll be the wilful ignorance.

Originally posted by PVS
the fact is that you connected one stated point to your point. that was the intention. but i guess when the statement is taken alone you can fake it and say you never made that connection, and i'll give it to you. smile <----see?

I more or less said leetspeak in that manner was immature and not funny, almost as bad as people who used it originally and "seriously". You just happened to be providing the examples in the thread, I don't hold you up as the only person who does it, but...you are one, so therefore you're included.

Wilful ignorance example two.

-AC

PVS
i also hate "LOL" and "ROFL" hence why i mock it. i mean, i dont hate it EVERY time, just when you know damn well that they are steamed up and gritting their teeth, as opposed to laughing out loud or rolling on the floor. another weak defense mechanism.

WrathfulDwarf
Hmm....don't you guys think we're over analyzing each other?

^Oh look! a logical fallacy.

(..whatever...)

Bardock42
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Hmm....don't you guys think we're over analyzing each other?

Certainly not in an analyzing thread.....

Alpha Centauri
I also hate "ROFL", if only because it reminds me of the name Rolf.

"Lol" I can...tolerate I guess, but when it gets into "Lololol" it needs to stop. If it's abbreviated words like "OMG" then I can tend to overlook it, because people also use "BTW" or "IMO".

All this "OMFG" and "ROFLMAO", disturbing.

-AC

PVS
my next observation...

tireless rebutting

the act of attempting to win an argument by

picking apart every single sentence of someone's post

in an attempt to give the illusion that they are

squashing every single word spoken by an opponent

when in actuallity they are simply conducting childish mocking and giving meaningless jabs

but its difficult to notice since nobody really reads these types of ego maniacle battles

simply because its usually not even focused on the topic but rather

on the opponent

and as each rebuttal is posted, the posts become exponentially longer

when someone else has the energy and care to engage in this pointless manner of squabbling

and all the time they fail to see that the topic has been killed and the thread is now all about them

-PVS

Bardock42
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I also hate "ROFL", if only because it reminds me of the name Rolf.

"Lol" I can...tolerate I guess, but when it gets into "Lololol" it needs to stop. If it's abbreviated words like "OMG" then I can tend to overlook it, because people also use "BTW" or "IMO".

All this "OMFG" and "ROFLMAO", disturbing.

-AC

What's wrong with Rolf...my uncle is named Rolf.....

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by PVS
my next observation...



the act of attempting to win an argument by



in an attempt to give the illusion that they are



when in actuallity they are simply conducting childish mocking and giving meaningless jabs



simply because its usually not even focused on the topic but rather



and as each rebuttal is posted, the posts become



and all the time they fail to see that the topic has been killed and the thread is now all about them

-PVS

Wilful ignorance example three, hypocricy example *pick a number*

-AC

PVS
twas a general statement. now lets drop it since i know the end result of carrying on will be my inbox flooded with tearful PM's.

The Omega

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>