Pseudo Badness?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
One question, then. I assume you mean I "proved" I need the last word? False, and wrong, but I'm curious how these two facets of your debate share the same page:

"Actually if someone counter posts you, you will get into a debate about it.".

"The fact is you like many people have an inborn need to have the last word on a subject and you cannot hold back when someone posts against your statement. ".

I'm not trying to get the last word, you just happened to have made a post I wished to reply to, making false claims and misintepreting my post. If you don't like that, it's tough.

It's not a matter of last word, it's a matter of me having something I need to reply to, and you were wrong in your claims and interpretation, that's the end of it. Now, of course YOU will want the last word, and I will afford you that, as this post and the one prior prove all I need to.

-AC

So it's the pious PC public relations version of your need to have the last word?

Originally posted by Starhawk
So it's the pious PC public relations version of your need to have the last word?

I'm not baiting him, just proving a point, keep in mind I don't think there's anything wrong with needing to have the last word, I just have issue with people who pretend to be above it.

Well if you understood AC's post, then you'd realize he wasn't "trying to have the last word" at all. You said something incorrect about him, and he was responding to that. That does not indicate a pathological need to have the last word.

Originally posted by Strangelove
Well if you understood AC's post, then you'd realize he wasn't "trying to have the last word" at all. You said something incorrect about him, and he was responding to that. That does not indicate a pathological need to have the last word.

Yes it does. He could have simply dismissed it and ignored it and taken the high road, but he choose not to. And right now you are proving my point as well.

Errr, someone pointing out an error that someone else made means they have a pathological need to get the last word?

What world do you live in again?

Originally posted by Lana
Errr, someone pointing out an error that someone else made means they have a pathological need to get the last word?

What world do you live in again?

He could have simply dismissed it and ignored it and taken the high road, but he choose not to.

So anyone who has the temerity to respond is 'trying to have the last word'? There's something to be said for common sense.

Someone says something untrue. The target of that statement doesn't respond. The maker of the statement then feels free to repeat it over and over again until people start to believe it. And then no matter what the target says, there's this hard-wired opinion of that person in the public's eye.

There's a difference between trying to have the last word and responding. You would do well to learn that.

Originally posted by Starhawk
He could have simply dismissed it and ignored it and taken the high road, but he choose not to.

How about you do the same, then, if you feel it's such an issue?

I love this. If you don't reply, you're running from the debate/argument/whatever, but if you do, it's because you HAVE to have the last word.

Originally posted by Lana
How about you do the same, then, if you feel it's such an issue?

I love this. If you don't reply, you're running from the debate/argument/whatever, but if you do, it's because you HAVE to have the last word.

I respond because I don't try to pretend that I am above wanting to have the last word. It's not very noble, but in the end more honest.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Yeah, that was entirely up to you, as I said in my previous post.

Other people taking a liking to me is BECAUSE of me, it is not UP to me.

You came on here with the rationale of: You're either my best friend or my enemy, or at least you hold that now.

That's not my rationale, that's just what happens. I'm saying in my general experience living and in social friendships, people either like me a lot or they completely despise me. There is no mediocre, no in-betweens . . . You see what I'm getting at?

You can't go around pinning that, or your ideas of respect, on people. Just because people don't wish to be friends or respect you, it doesn't mean they hate you. It doesn't necessarily mean they have to be disrespectful either, I admit, and maybe people HAVE been a little more confrontational than you deserve in your early days, but you aren't really helping to reverse the situation. I'm not your enemy, I'm not your friend, there are things I dislike about your attitude on here and I can say you feel the same, but I don't even know you, nobody does, so how can anyone really hate anyone here?

I can totally see where you're coming from here, and I understand. I don't wish to have people bow down to me or kiss my arse but I at least DO expect a little bit of respect or maturity coming from people that claim to act like humans, not animals. I mean, I opened a thread to ask for peoples opinion and what they thought about an issue I thought was apparent.

If you disagree, why not just come in and say:

"I disagree with you, Sorgo. I do not think anyone has been attempting to act tough. I have not seen anyone acting tough."

Lana was respectful enough not to barge in here and insult me, but instead, she expressed her opinion and how she felt about the issue which I thought was very mature on her part.

Instead? Well, I get this:

"You're stupid, rofl!"

"Lol, watch me ridicule this thread like I do ervey onther one!1 eh, rofl?"

I don't wish for a perfect forum where people are all nice to each other and love each other. I don't expect rainbows, butterflies and bunny rabbits BUT there should at least be a somewhat civilized level of respect and some courtesy for other peoples opinions.

No, not here. It's a circus.

I guarantee, if you weren't so eager to debate such small things, people here would stop having such a problem with you. If you committed half the dedication to posting you've exhibited here, into actual topics, you might even become a valued member of this forum.

It's not like I enjoy debating small things, but go back and review most of my debates here. Go to the beginning. Most of the time, I am on the defending side of the debate and I have been challenged or someone has said I'm wrong. Well, I debate it. Sometimes I'm right, and sometimes I'm wrong. I've admitted when I'm wrong (Even though no one else has. Seriously, never seen it here. EVER.) and I've even taken responsibility for mistakes and I've apologized for outbursts. I've given respect in the past and I've offered my friendship.

I get spat on, challenged and then when I come back with full force, I get to be the villain.

It's like a guy who pokes another guy all day and when the other guy finally reacts and turns around with all knuckles ready, he gets charged or he's to blame.

It's not like I'm whining for things to change. I don't expect it to, but even a little bit of respect being shown would be nice. I have to go through hell to make my intentions clear sometimes. It's ridiculous.

The point being here: I am who I am. I believe in mutual respect between people and civilized discussion. I am human. I get mad, happy and sad. It's that basic. I am who I am. I offer friendship to people and I give people chances. I tend to give more respect to some people than they deserve, but that doesn't matter.

I am who I am. I'm not going anywhere.

The general point I'm trying to make is: If people don't like me for who I am, you can kiss my ass and learn to deal with my presence.

I'm not going to act like someone else, become funny or try to be like a hardcore bastard to get a certain reputation about myself AND to gain popularity.

I have good qualities and bad ones. I can debate and I do have a passion for it. Half the time, I'm debating bullshit so ... You can't really determine how skilled I am. That will change soon though. The semantic arguments of who said what is growing tiring now.

Don't take this post as me trying to PROVE YOU WRONG or anything, I'm trying to make you see that having such extremes of views isn't helping.

I know you're not trying to prove me wrong or debate me, AC. Don't worry.

That's just my two cents. I'm not getting into a debate about it. It's just advice, you'll either use it or you won't.[/B]

I know.

You flatterer you. Careful, you might just get some tonight, you're the girl though, on account of this -

Sorry brother, but I'm pitcher and you're catcher. Question me again and I won't give you any. Hmph!

No, I'm very happy that I didn't read, I spared myself minutes of boredom and lowering my IQ, see.

Excuse and bad rhetoric to escape actually putting effort into jack shit, but nice. How can your IQ get any lower, by the way?

There is a difference between us, friend, one that anyone with any semblance of reasoning can see, my posts are for the sake of comedy and humor. You have been utterly serious this entire time, and had to resort to insinuating someone is stupid, and crying about how people treated you bad (Appeal to pity) all while complaining that others aren't debating with you, and that they don't know how.

One, you obviously don't know what appealing to pity is. It is a logical fallacy and it is when you attempt to reinforce your point by exploiting your OPPONENTS pity, not your own. What I said was logically applicable, because it's true. I don't care what you call it. YOU don't matter.

They aren't debating me. Just now, they wanted to tell me that an ENGLISH WORD wasn't legitimate. I proved them wrong and they tried to drag it on for a bit until using an escape method to forfeit because they know they're wrong. It's that simple. I've been wrong before and I've admitted it. I've been right before and no one else can man up. Simple, simple, simple and simple.

But, Hawking doesn't have to run, he has a chair to do it for him, he can just sit and laugh and drink a coke while another object does the work for him. See, you are my chair, friend. You are proving me right by taking any of what I'm saying seriously when it's clear that my intent wasn't to actually argue with you, but have and make fun of your argument (since they suck, you see).

You didn't quite catch the metaphor. If you did and you're just joshing (Here, I'll hand you an excuse.) then at least it when through and didn't pop back out, right? We're accomplishing SOMETHING here. Good to know.

You insulted my debating skill. You think I'm going to sit there and let you mock me? Sorry, but you're toying with the wrong entity here.

I do have a clue how you debate, like this -

Truly the skills of a master debater.

No, it isn't. You're just picking favorites to aid your argument. A traditional fallacy, really. Watch me do it right back to you, Backfire. Love the user name, by the way. Suits you.

Originally posted by BackFire
Because, for liking it so much, you seem to not know how to do it properly.

Who gives a shit?

Originally posted by BackFire
Sadly, I think you've failed at both.

Originally posted by BackFire
desperation of trying to prove to yourself that you can debate worth a damn.

Originally posted by BackFire
whatever horseshit you've been going on about all day.

Okay, now wait . . .

"You can't debate, Backfire. You have no skill. Watch me accuse you of false bullshit I cannot back up."

^ There you have it! A good ol' fashioned Backfire argument in a nutshell. Amazing, huh?

Yes, I know what you were arguing about, as you just acknowledged, so why did you lie earlier and act as if I didn't? I knew the whole time, as you've just said. How? From reading? Not your entire posts, mind you, because they would give me brain cancer, but enough to give me the idea that what you're arguing over is ****ing stupid, which wouldn't be a problem if you weren't so stiff as to not even approach it in a silly manner, as I'm doing here.

No, I didn't lie earlier. You didn't know. You thought we'd been arguing about legitimate wording all day. Why? You didn't read and then you spoke out of ignorance, something you favor doing in wide abundances.

Don't dismiss this as you joking. Sure, you throw a joke here and there, but you're actually still attempting to debate. You can't call this all you being silly and that you're not debating. Why? I'm SITTING here watching you debate me, that's why.

As said above, the difference is I'm approaching it in the proper state of mind - silly. You approached yours with the steadfast determination of an AIDS victim preaching about the dangers of unsafe sex, all on account of a ****ing word. Oh wait, this segment reeks of seriousness, doesn't it? Poop! There, that's better.

Nice try, but ... Read above. I don't have determination. I find this worth very little effort, to be honest. Being goofy isn't going to make right. It'll make you ... Goofy, essentially.

It's a like a man enter a board room ready for serious discussion, wearing a nice Gucci suit while juggling rotten eggs and dancing with pink shoes on.

Yeah, write a poem crying about it, holy shit. I'm sure your "acting nice" was as boring and pompous as you in your current form. So no wonder no one liked you, be nice, be mean, same result. How interesting.

You're being ignorant again. This is not me being pompous, this is me not caring about shit anymore. Getting it yet? Do I have to repeat it more? Oh yeah, forgot. You don't read much, do you?

What excuse? That it felt like your argument had been going on for a day? That was no excuse, that was a clear exaggeration. Guess it went over your head, though.

No, I told you. I ignore most of the crappy semantics that consist of irrelevant mockery and basic stupidity. The excuse was you thinking you're in a safe zone because you mock people during debates.

Evidence le evidence, monsieur.

My posting is fun, fun for me, and others. Reading your stuff isn't. Also, no whining occurred, it was me saying that your posts were lame and not worth reading fully. Here, since you don't know what whining means, I'll show you. This is whining --

If you didn't read everything, you cannot determine how well I debate. If you don't present proof, you cannot. All you're doing is saying how lame my posting is. Everything you're saying right now means nothing. Why? You're just saying it for the sake of saying it and being stupid.

For example:

Backfire, you suck at debating. You're not smart because you joke all the time. Your personality belongs at the bottom of my shoe.

A child can do this, Backfire. Not hard. Rofl.

Also, for someone saying you have no trouble reading, you sure did manage to quote me saying something that I didn't say. Show me where I said "You suck at debating". I said you don't know how to do it properly (you don't, as proven above with simple quotes from you engaging in what you considered a real debate), that you were going about it like a 13 year old girl (by whining and trying to make people feel sorry for you, as quoted above), and so on.

Wow, you have comprehension problems ALONG with reading problems? Oh noes, poor you. It was a figurative analysis showing that all you've done here is state how bad my debating skills have but you've done nothing to reinforce your point or even try to come across with something worthy of being considering proof subjectively.

I don't want anyone to feel sorry for me. I'm telling them what's going on and how I feel about it. An expression of my opinion, and nothing more.

Then again, I'm sure you'll f*ck up comprehending that, because, y'know ...

You mean that quote I factually didn't say? Why? It just covers that you are lying or unaware of what I actually did say.

Oh yeah, read above.

Escapism? When did I do that? By pointing out that your arguments were broken and factually improper? And that what you were arguing over is stupid? That's not escapism, I'm avoiding nothing, well, except your shitty posts. But that's not a bad thing.

Escapism isn't about avoidance. Perhaps you'd like to go look it up on your spare time? You haven't made any points. All you've done is come across about how ignorant and ridiculous you can be. You picked apart what you wanted to see, you threw a few labels on me and WANTED it to be evidence that I couldn't debate.

You failed, Backfire. I'm soooooooooooooo sorry. *Cries*

Boy you sure like talking about yourself. Guess you have to, though. Since apparantly no one likes you.

But, I've already explained that I don...

Oh yeah, the whole "reading" thing. Huhuhuhuhu!

Hurry up, brother. I'm waiting for you to repeat yourself again.

Want a coffee?

Originally posted by Sorgo X
Sorry brother, but I'm pitcher and you're catcher. Question me again and I won't give you any. Hmph!

Look, it's the most persuasive thing you've said in the entire thread. I'll think it over.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
Excuse and bad rhetoric to escape actually putting effort into jack shit, but nice. How can your IQ get any lower, by the way?

As I said, by reading your posts...psshhh, boy. And you say I have reading comprehension problems.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
One, you obviously don't know what appealing to pity is. It is a logical fallacy and it is when you attempt to reinforce your point by exploiting your OPPONENTS pity, not your own. What I said was logically applicable, because it's true. I don't care what you call it. YOU don't matter.

That's what you did, try to make your opponent pity you, if not, that's sure as hell how it came across. What was logically applicable about "You were never nice to me, you're mean to me I tried to be nice but you weren't nice back to me so now I'm a mean little Sorgo!" What the heck does that have to do with the topic that was being discussed? It doesn't, it was you...appealing to pity.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
They aren't debating me. Just now, they wanted to tell me that an ENGLISH WORD wasn't legitimate. I proved them wrong and they tried to drag it on for a bit until using an escape method to forfeit because they know they're wrong. It's that simple. I've been wrong before and I've admitted it. I've been right before and no one else can man up. Simple, simple, simple and simple.

If they weren't debating then why were you calling it a debate? It takes two to debate... (doesn't have the same ring to it as "Tango", does it?)

Originally posted by Sorgo X
You didn't quite catch the metaphor. If you did and you're just joshing (Here, I'll hand you an excuse.) then at least it when through and didn't pop back out, right? We're accomplishing SOMETHING here. Good to know.

Joshing? My name isn't Josh.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
You insulted my debating skill. You think I'm going to sit there and let you mock me? Sorry, but you're toying with the wrong entity here.

Entity, hahahaha, good choice of wording there, man. Funny stuff, picking the word that is often used for God's. Was it intentional? Good show.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
No, it isn't. You're just picking favorites to aid your argument. A traditional fallacy, really. Watch me do it right back to you, Backfire. Love the user name, by the way. Suits you.

Of course, you did all that while trying to carry on a legitimate debate (or so you claimed). I've admitted that I'm NOT. Hence the difference. Also, you can't possibly try and say that mine, which were addressing your actual debating skills and the wackiness of the discussion in general, is as bad as yours, which were directed at actually insulting your opponents intellect.

I've not once insinuated that you are stupid, have I? As you have to me and several others during your "debates". You think that is sound debate procedure? That's what's funny about the whole thing, and why I couldn't bring myself to have a serious debate with you, you don't deserve one. You apparently think calling people stupid, and saying they aren't men have a place in real debates. Try that in a real debate and you'll get laughed at, kinda like now. Another logical fallacy for you, since I have to teach them to you - Ad Hominem. Which you've committed.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
Okay, now wait . . .

"You can't debate, Backfire. You have no skill. Watch me accuse you of false bullshit I cannot back up."

^ There you have it! A good ol' fashioned Backfire argument in a nutshell. Amazing, huh?

Yes, except my quotes were from you during what you considered you actually having a debate with someone, mine were from what I've said to be posts of me NOT having a debate.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
No, I didn't lie earlier. You didn't know. You thought we'd been arguing about legitimate wording all day. Why? You didn't read and then you spoke out of ignorance, something you favor doing in wide abundances.

But you just said I did know what you were arguing about, what you're saying is that I didn't know HOW LONG it had been going on. The two aren't the same.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
Don't dismiss this as you joking. Sure, you throw a joke here and there, but you're actually still attempting to debate. You can't call this all you being silly and that you're not debating. Why? I'm SITTING here watching you debate me, that's why.

In a way, yes. In another way, nah. There are arguments in my posts, but they're not in a serious manner.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
Nice try, but ... Read above. I don't have determination. I find this worth very little effort, to be honest. Being goofy isn't going to make right. It'll make you ... Goofy, essentially.

It's a like a man enter a board room ready for serious discussion, wearing a nice Gucci suit while juggling rotten eggs and dancing with pink shoes on.

Yes! That's very correct! I don't CARE about being right, don't you see? Plus, that man juggling in pink shoes would make the board room much more festive and entertaining, turning boring work into something of fun.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
You're being ignorant again. This is not me being pompous, this is me not caring about shit anymore. Getting it yet? Do I have to repeat it more? Oh yeah, forgot. You don't read much, do you?

It is you acting pompous. That is how you come across, whether you intend it or not. If you want to repeat something, can you repeat that part where you were whining about people treating you bad while you were being nice to them, all the while calling people stupid, not men, and stupid again, while complaining they don't know how to debate?

It was funny, see.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
No, I told you. I ignore most of the crappy semantics that consist of irrelevant mockery and basic stupidity. The excuse was you thinking you're in a safe zone because you mock people during debates.

Evidence le evidence, monsieur.

Mock YOU during your debates, you mean. I couldn't help it, there you were, calling folk stupid, while saying you were having a serious debate, then calling them stupid again, then saying they don't know how to debate. That's factually bad debating, you can go on saying that you don't care. And to cut you off before you go and make yourself look funny - Putting someones argument down is not the same and putting the PERSON down, which is what you did.

Evidence blah blah blah, monster.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
If you didn't read everything, you cannot determine how well I debate. If you don't present proof, you cannot. All you're doing is saying how lame my posting is. Everything you're saying right now means nothing. Why? You're just saying it for the sake of saying it and being stupid.

For example:

Backfire, you suck at debating. You're not smart because you joke all the time. Your personality belongs at the bottom of my shoe.

A child can do this, Backfire. Not hard. Rofl.

I can though, because in the few posts I did read, you attacked people several times, called them stupid, insinuated that they were stupid, gone after them for not debating with you, and claimed they couldn't debate. Where's this idea coming from that I have to read everything you write to know whether or not you did something wrong? I read a a few posts, in those posts you did something wrong, it doesn't matter what you did in previous posts, you still ****ed up in that post. I'm not saying it for the sake of saying it, I'm saying it because it's true.

The difference is, as I've said many times, is that I'm not here trying to have a genuine debate with you.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
Wow, you have comprehension problems ALONG with reading problems? Oh noes, poor you. It was a figurative analysis showing that all you've done here is state how bad my debating skills have but you've done nothing to reinforce your point or even try to come across with something worthy of being considering proof subjectively.

I don't want anyone to feel sorry for me. I'm telling them what's going on and how I feel about it. An expression of my opinion, and nothing more.

Then again, I'm sure you'll f*ck up comprehending that, because, y'know ...

It was figurative? Funny, I thought those things around the statement were quotes, you know, those little curvy lines to denote that you are using someones exact wording?

I've reinforced my point fine, by quoting you belittling and insulting others during a "debate". That's bad debating, and it's all I need to do to show that you were debating poorly.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
Escapism isn't about avoidance. Perhaps you'd like to go look it up on your spare time? You haven't made any points. All you've done is come across about how ignorant and ridiculous you can be. You picked apart what you wanted to see, you threw a few labels on me and WANTED it to be evidence that I couldn't debate.

You failed, Backfire. I'm soooooooooooooo sorry. *Cries*

es·cap·ism /ɪˈskeɪpɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[i-skey-piz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
the avoidance of reality by absorption of the mind in entertainment or in an imaginative situation, activity, etc.

I picked apart what I wanted to see? So you mean to say you didn't insult people? You didn't say someone "Wasn't a man" during your debate? I made all this up because I just wanted to see it? What crap, you said it, it was bad debating, I said so, you danced around trying to deny it. At least you're getting exercise.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
I don't wish for a perfect forum where people are all nice to each other and love each other. I don't expect rainbows, butterflies and bunny rabbits BUT there should at least be a somewhat civilized level of respect and some courtesy for other peoples opinions.

Like this?

Can you really be this stupid?

You don't know shit.

You cannot man up, being that you aren't a man.

Are you truly THAT stupid

Dude, you're so full of shit. You go on about how people should show some respect or maturity, and then spout of BS like that, and then act like it's their fault for making you the way you are.

No wonder you're the laughing stock of so many people, read your posts.

Sorgo -"I want people to be nice and respectful and mature"

*next post*
"ARE YOU REALLY THAT STUPID, YOU"RE NOT A MAN ROFL"

Look, it's the most persuasive thing you've said in the entire thread. I'll think it over.

Too late. Now some other lucky person gets to have my piece of ass.

Your loss. Hmph!

As I said, by reading your posts...psshhh, boy. And you say I have reading comprehension problems.

I say that ... Because you do have reading comprehension problems.

That's what you did, try to make your opponent pity you, if not, that's sure as hell how it came across. What was logically applicable about "You were never nice to me, you're mean to me I tried to be nice but you weren't nice back to me so now I'm a mean little Sorgo!" What the heck does that have to do with the topic that was being discussed? It doesn't, it was you...appealing to pity.

It's good that you acknowledged your mistake. *Endsarcasmrofl.

We were having a DISCUSSION. A part of discussion is talking and displaying your opinion. Nothing about that affirmed to the relevance of my debate either, so you're STILL wrong.

Some examples are as follows (Taken from Wikipedia):

"You must have graded my exam incorrectly. I studied very hard for weeks specifically because I knew my career depended on getting a good grade. If you give me a failing grade I'm ruined!"

"I hope you like my proposal. It took me six years to write and I don't know what I'd do if you rejected it."

"I really deserve a raise. Unless I make more money I may lose my home."

"I hope you find the defendant not guilty of embezzlement. Just look at the poor guy, he's in a wheelchair. Show some sympathy!"

I was explaining what I thought was my opinion which was relevant to that issue. I was saying no one ever showed me respect, so now I won't deliver respect. Nothing there was parallel and applied to the actual debate.

This makes you wrong again, by the way.

If they weren't debating then why were you calling it a debate? It takes two to debate... (doesn't have the same ring to it as "Tango", does it?)

Ooooooh, nice try but I can see bad persuasion techniques from a mile away.

You said:

"You have been utterly serious this entire time, and had to resort to insinuating someone is stupid, and crying about how people treated you bad (Appeal to pity) all while complaining that others aren't debating with you, and that they don't know how."

I explained that they WEREN'T debating with me because they were trying to leave and excusing what I was saying as baiting and making excuses to leave the argument after being proven wrong.

Joshing? My name isn't Josh.

It's an expression, son.

Entity, hahahaha, good choice of wording there, man. Funny stuff, picking the word that is often used for God's. Was it intentional? Good show.

You're laughing at me? Watch this:

ENTITY

"1. something that has a real existence; thing: corporeal entities.
2. being or existence, esp. when considered as distinct, independent, or self-contained: He conceived of society as composed of particular entities requiring special treatment.
3. essential nature: The entity of justice is universality.

Are you saying these God's you speak of are real? *GASP*

Of course, you did all that while trying to carry on a legitimate debate (or so you claimed). I've admitted that I'm NOT. Hence the difference. Also, you can't possibly try and say that mine, which were addressing your actual debating skills and the wackiness of the discussion in general, is as bad as yours, which were directed at actually insulting your opponents intellect.

That was the subject of debate, you blind BAT. Too bad. We were debating about different topics. That's what people do. I was QUESTIONING his intelligence, not telling him how stupid he was.

I've not once insinuated that you are stupid, have I? As you have to me and several others during your "debates".

That thing, that thing that's bolded there is a logical fallacy we call "Appealing to the majority".

Tehehe.

No, but you've insulted my debating skills. I disagree. I think I'm fairly good at debating.

You think that is sound debate procedure? That's what's funny about the whole thing, and why I couldn't bring myself to have a serious debate with you, you don't deserve one. You apparently think calling people stupid, and saying they aren't men have a place in real debates. Try that in a real debate and you'll get laughed at, kinda like now. Another logical fallacy for you, since I have to teach them to you - Ad Hominem. Which you've committed.

I've commited Ad Hominem? No. Why not? Once again, me calling them these names was in reply to what they said and it did not affirm to the relevant topic at hand.

Here, I'll walk you through it again.

"Person A makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person A
Therefore claim X is false "

I never said "Well, A is stupid. Therefore, his claim is false." That's an Ad Hominem.

You have a lot to learn, it seems.

And stop presenting that lame excuse that you're not trying. You know damn well you're trying or you wouldn't be spending this much time replying to my debates and trying to make me look like I have below shoddy debating skills.

By the way, If my skills are as bad as you claim, this makes yours beyond terrible.

Fine, I can do that too man. Watch the magic happen:

I'm not trying. This debate is easy to me, it's like I'm debating a child. Simple.

Yes, except my quotes were from you during what you considered you actually having a debate with someone, mine were from what I've said to be posts of me NOT having a debate.

This ... This right here ... This is a debate. What I quoted you from? Debate. One was actually just a rant to attempt to deteriorate my debating skills. The rest? Debating.

You think because you say this isn't a debate, it'll magically stop being a debate? Or it won't BE a debate as a WHOLE anymore?

So bad. Hahaha.

But you just said I did know what you were arguing about, what you're saying is that I didn't know HOW LONG it had been going on. The two aren't the same.

You actually did both.

A) You thought the debate that had long posts was referring to legitimate wording, that's why you thought we arguing all day. This means you did not initially know what I was arguing about.

B) You also didn't know how long because the true debate actually was within an hour. You figured this out later on.

In a way, yes. In another way, nah. There are arguments in my posts, but they're not in a serious manner.

Bottom line is: This is a debate, as much as you joke or not.

Yes! That's very correct! I don't CARE about being right, don't you see? Plus, that man juggling in pink shoes would make the board room much more festive and entertaining, turning boring work into something of fun.

You do, or we wouldn't be arguing. You're contradicting yourself and THAT is what you accused the whole core of my shitty debating BEING.

Hahaha, Weak sauce.

It is you acting pompous. That is how you come across, whether you intend it or not. If you want to repeat something, can you repeat that part where you were whining about people treating you bad while you were being nice to them, all the while calling people stupid, not men, and stupid again, while complaining they don't know how to debate?

You'll see that I've gone over this in a post below me. Here, it involves this special item:

Originally posted by Sorgo X

The point being here: I am who I am. I believe in mutual respect between people and civilized discussion. I am human. I get mad, happy and sad. It's that basic. I am who I am. I offer friendship to people and I give people chances. I tend to give more respect to some people than they deserve, but that doesn't matter.

It was funny, see.

Your jokes are dry, but you're very funny.

Mock YOU during your debates, you mean. I couldn't help it, there you were, calling folk stupid, while saying you were having a serious debate, then calling them stupid again, then saying they don't know how to debate. That's factually bad debating, you can go on saying that you don't care. And to cut you off before you go and make yourself look funny - Putting someones argument down is not the same and putting the PERSON down, which is what you did.

Calling someone stupid = Bad debating? That's such a fallacy. Holy f*ck!

That is the premise of your debate, right? Even though I've explained it was a retort to an insult. Instead of pointing out, I return to sender.

Evidence blah blah blah, monster.

You truly can't debate. You use the whole "I don't take it seriously" as an excuse, but you're somewhat trying and THAT isn't even helping you. Sad, huh?

For example:

Backfire, you suck at debating. You're not smart because you joke all the time. Your personality belongs at the bottom of my shoe.

A child can do this, Backfire. Not hard. Rofl.

I can though, because in the few posts I did read, you attacked people several times, called them stupid, insinuated that they were stupid, gone after them for not debating with you, and claimed they couldn't debate. Where's this idea coming from that I have to read everything you write to know whether or not you did something wrong? I read a a few posts, in those posts you did something wrong, it doesn't matter what you did in previous posts, you still ****ed up in that post. I'm not saying it for the sake of saying it, I'm saying it because it's true.

THERE YOU GO, BACKFIRE! ONLY READ THE BOLDED PART OF YOUR POST! WHY?

It's the part that proves my point.

A) You did not read the entire argument. Therefore, the epitome of your debate is based on a foundation of ignorance.

B) They attacked me first. I attacked back. Simple enough for you to read there, Backfire?

C) They did not admit they were wrong. They just tried to say that I was being stubborn, but they did not admit it. They insisted on running because of an overdeveloped pride.

D) They couldn't. For whatever reason, THEY COULD NOT. Why? They didn't. They ran off. I proved them wrong. Easy to understand, no?

The difference is, as I've said many times, is that I'm not here trying to have a genuine debate with you.

As I explained above, this is an excuse to blanket poor debating.

It was figurative? Funny, I thought those things around the statement were quotes, you know, those little curvy lines to denote that you are using someones exact wording?

No, it was a figurative analysis. That's why I repeated it because that was essentially the primary ingredient in your lacking argument against me.

I've reinforced my point fine, by quoting you belittling and insulting others during a "debate". That's bad debating, and it's all I need to do to show that you were debating poorly.

No, it isn't. You obviously don't have even a substantiate knowledge on debating whatsoever, or you'd know what you said was just pure bullshit. You pulled pieces from my debate and slapped them into a post and said "You can't debate". That's not proving anything, Backfire. I'm sorry to burst your bubble.

Not to mention most of those are replies to being called that, but hey, Backfire is selective, right?

es·cap·ism /ɪˈskeɪpɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[i-skey-piz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
the avoidance of reality by absorption of the mind in entertainment or in an imaginative situation, activity, etc.

"Escapism is mental diversion by means of entertainment or recreation."

^ There's a quote for you. It's more diversion than it is avoidance, because avoiding somewhat involves ignoring but this is diversion by means of joking.

I picked apart what I wanted to see? So you mean to say you didn't insult people? You didn't say someone "Wasn't a man" during your debate? I made all this up because I just wanted to see it? What crap, you said it, it was bad debating, I said so, you danced around trying to deny it. At least you're getting exercise.

Well, yeah I did.

You just proved you can't debate. This is proof here. Why, do you ask? You put words in my mouth. I never said anything about not insulting anyone. Me insulting the person BACK was just PART of my debating. Like I said, you're still being selective and you haven't defeated my point by putting words in my mouth and asking me what you did. Whoa, I caught your dodge pal.

To answer you, yes you did. You picked apart EXACTLY what you wanted to see. You've insulted me during this debate. By your logic, this means you cannot debate yourself.

Faulty logic is awesome because you can always throw it back in someone's face.

Like this?

Dude, you're so full of shit. You go on about how people should show some respect or maturity, and then spout of BS like that, and then act like it's their fault for making you the way you are.

No wonder you're the laughing stock of so many people, read your posts.

Sorgo -"I want people to be nice and respectful and mature"

*next post*
"ARE YOU REALLY THAT STUPID, YOU"RE NOT A MAN ROFL"

You're being selective again. Either that, or your shoddy reading comprehension is kicking in again.

Wow, a loss/loss situation for Backfire.

It's too bad you skipped over the following:

Originally posted by Sorgo X

The point being here: I am who I am. I believe in mutual respect between people and civilized discussion. I am human. I get mad, happy and sad. It's that basic. I am who I am. I offer friendship to people and I give people chances. I tend to give more respect to some people than they deserve, but that doesn't matter.

I can get you these awesome pair of specs if you have troubles reading.

Or I can club you over the head with a sledgehammer to fix that selective tendency.

Originally posted by Sorgo X
Lately, I've been seeing a lot of people purposely trying to mean or badass and it's so pathetic and embarassing.

Has anyone else noticed this? Please express your opinion on this issue. Thanks.

YA WHITE POWER!!!..........................oh damn wrong thread sorry.

Errrr...yeah.

Attacking someone back places you just as much at fault, you realize. It's not at all excusable.

Sorgo, I'm going to skip over the needless statements because our posts are getting to long. Just assume what I would have posted would be funny.

First and foremost, Wikipedia is certainly not a valid source for anything, as anyone can edit any of the pages. Also, you seem to be thinking that for a fallacy to be applicable, it must be identical to one of the examples. That's not how it works. Those examples were merely for teaching purposes, the most base and obvious forms of the fallacy. It can and does apply to what your posts were, a continuations of your arguments. The appeal to pity fallacy still applies to you, because, while yes it wasn't contained within the direct argument, it was done to try to further hinder their argument and strengthen yours, your discussion was still going on, it was still based on whether the word was proper or not, as such, it's applicable.

Also no, there were no insults towards you that I've seen from either Puzzle or Strangelove. Please quote them. As it is, all I've seen is you attacking others for disagreeing with you in a rather civilized manner.

Puzzle said you were baiting, you responded by calling him a "Biased moron". Where was his insult that angered you so and justifies your insult?

Puzzle later also said "He's right it's not proper English" Too which you replied "Can you really be this stupid...?" Again, where is his insult? I don't see it. You then went on to say "Are you truly THAT stupid..." Also, your claim that you weren't insulting them but "questioning their intelligence" is nonsense. You saying "Are you truly THAT stupid" is a loaded question. It implies that he IS stupid, but the degree of how stupid is questionable. That was just a lazy excuse.

Finally, strangelove said "You don't want to entertain your laughable debating skills" Too which you said he wasn't a man. Once again, where's his insult to you? It doesn't exist. If they are there, please provide proof of your claim. I believe you are lying, or your seeing things that aren't there for your own convenience. Your justification of "They insulted me first" is shit, as far as I can tell, seeing as I've not seen one actual insult from them aimed at you, where as I've seen several from you aimed at them.

Now you claim that I committed Appeal to the Majority. I've never heard of this one. I assume you mean Appeal to Popularity. If that's the case, then you are indeed wrong. Appeal to Popularity is when you say an argument is right because many believe it to be true. I did no such thing. I simply said you insulted others and myself, which you did. Has nothing to do with people agreeing with me, it has to do with the actions you've committed. Simply bringing up something you did to others isn't Appealing to Popularity.

I also didn't put words in your mouth. You claim that you aren't denying that you insulted people. But in the same post, you denied it, saying that you were "questioning their intelligence". That's denial, right there.

Ad Hominem was committed. Again, you're thinking that it must be identical to the examples or else it's not true. That would be wrong, there are many variations to these, it doesn't have to be done in the exact wording of the examples, they're just there to simplify the fallacy so people can understand it. You insulted them during your arguments, even before it ended, such as when you called Puzzle a biased moron. That WAS while the discussion was going on, and that IS Ad Hominem, you were attacking him to try and weaken his statement. It's very simple.

Finally, I'll say again, I don't need to read every single post of yours to know that you insulted people, and yes, calling someone stupid IS bad debating - Fact. Ask any professor or anyone with any knowledge of the rules of debate, it's bad form.