First Blood

I've never seen an argument so intense, yet so controlled, on KMC; and on an un-SW-related (?) topic no less. Hats off to you two.

Well, on KMC you don't get banned for formulating your own opinions, no matter how irrelevant they are. At the same time, this debate is a lot more heated and controversial than the actual match.

Well, on KMC you don't get banned for formulating your own opinions, no matter how irrelevant they are

1. I'm not mentioning EOD as much as every forum with these rules
2. If by good reason you mean I went against someone who can preach logic all day but can't apply it to a debate, much less objectively, and who parades around the whole being a mod nonsense, then you are correct.

I am forced to agree with this statement. Threatening to ban Glentract because he's using Wong's pseudomath seems a bit over the top, imo.

1. Please. You've been b*tching about the place all week, for no reason.
2. By good reason I mean that you were warned numerous times throughout the thread, that you decided to completely ignore the opponent's actual argument - that yours was invalid - and that you're a sock. There's really incontrovertible evidence for that (your IP address), and that alone deserves a perma-ban. Even better is that it was a well-known fact that you'd been banned before, but the staff never took any action against you. Want to try your luck with KMC's mods?

ermm

I think he already has. He's still here isn't he? We all know who he is, as well.

I'm sure they'd react differently - Ush especially - if they saw the matching IP addresses...

And as to Glentract, Blax; you understand the guy tried to explain Force power in terms of calories, right? He's out of control in the math department, and he's been stretching out a stupid argument for days, one that's already been stomped into the ground. Not to mention that Illustrious never actually threatened to ban him; he simply gave his first verbal warning.

I actually agree that the things that go on in Star Wars, like the force, can't be quantified the way he says it can. I'm just saying... warning him because fo it seems.. a bit over the top. However, he could have gotten it much worse. I've actually seen people get banned over stuff like that, so I'm not complaining.

This is a matter of opinion on your part. I can just as easily say Groban and Bolton DO surpass Perry as evident by some of their operas. As far as "pure slaughter", that is also a matter of opinion. Truthfully, I don't know if this is something that can be debated, as we both have our own opinions on the subject..

It isn't a matter of opinion, Darth Sexy. You can compare vocal performances by each artist and objectively dictate which one exhibits superior power, range, and control. Perry shits on Marx, and he's performed better than Groban and Bolton consistently. Not everything is subjective, as you can gauge vocal ability based on these three requirements. And this is where Marx, Bolton, and Groban don't measure up.

I think singing abilities ARE subjective, which is why we are arguing over Bolton, Groban, Marx, and Perry.

Singing ability isn't subjective. Power, range, and control are objective. Which vocalist one prefers is subjective. But that isn't the argument.

Originally posted by Faunus
1. Please. You've been b*tching about the place all week, for no reason.
2. By good reason I mean that you were warned numerous times throughout the thread, that you decided to completely ignore the opponent's actual argument - that yours was invalid - and that you're a sock. There's really incontrovertible evidence for that (your IP address), and that alone deserves a perma-ban. Even better is that it was a well-known fact that you'd been banned before, but the staff never took any action against you. Want to try your luck with KMC's mods?

Please show me where I have been "bitching". And if I HAVE been bitching, please show me how it's been for a week. Go ahead..

My argument was NOT invalid. The other argument was not only invalid, but the same fallacies that were preached, were committed as well.

Furthermore, I wouldn't get banned on this forum because the mods aren't antisocial psuedointellectuals that preach logic all day but couldn't apply it, nor debate objectively..

Not to mention I've proven who I am and who I am not on this forum, and besides this blaxican hydra character, who never contributes to debates, everybody knows who I am.

I'm not going to lecture about off-topic arguments since Darth Sexy and I are debating about Michael Bolton, Steve Perry, and Richard Marx on a Star Wars versus thread -- but perhaps you could both try to be more civil to one another? And I will also say that I have had my problems with the management of EoD on more than one occasion, as you well know, and I'm not the only one.

Originally posted by Gideon
It isn't a matter of opinion, Darth Sexy. You can compare vocal performances by each artist and objectively dictate which one exhibits superior power, range, and control. Perry shits on Marx, and he's performed better than Groban and Bolton consistently. Not everything is subjective, as you can gauge vocal ability based on these three requirements. And this is where Marx, Bolton, and Groban don't measure up.

Singing ability isn't subjective. Power, range, and control are objective. Which vocalist one prefers is subjective. But that isn't the argument. [/B]

I'm not telling you who I prefer but I am arguing that singing abilities can't POSSIBLY be objective because we both have knowledge on these singers, yet we disagree on who has the better range and singing abilities.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Please show me where I have been "bitching". And if I HAVE been bitching, please show me how it's been for a week. Go ahead..

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Yea KMC is the most objective forum i've ever been on. The rest just ban you when they're wrong or when you don't agree with their ridiculous views.

To which Glentract replies:

Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
Referring to EoD perhaps? lol

And you reply with a duh. There's more, as I'm sure aware of, but again, I'm not wasting time finding it.

My argument was NOT invalid. The other argument was not only invalid, but the same fallacies that were preached, were committed as well.

"Character A was shown doing more than Character B, so Character A > Character B."

Nice work.

Furthermore, I wouldn't get banned on this forum because the mods aren't antisocial psuedointellectuals that preach logic all day but couldn't apply it, nor debate objectively..

Not to mention I've proven who I am and who I am not on this forum, and besides this blaxican hydra character, who never contributes to debates, everybody knows who I am.

This may be true for Perry vs. Marx. While I agree Perry has a bigger range, I don't think it's a slaughter. HOWEVER, it IS subjective because based on every single Groban and Bolton performance, I have surmised that those two are a little better than Perry. They are at the very least in his vocal range.

Richard Marx versus Steve Perry? In range? Yes. It's a slaughter. Perry can hit higher notes -- by far (I'll link you to some songs) -- and he also lowered his range to hit baritone notes, which is Marx's general range. The only place that Perry can't hit is bass, but most professional vocalists can't anyways. Perry vs. Bolton? Again, Perry's head voice and falsetto is higher, clearer, and stronger than Bolton's. And Groban's. They might be able to go lower, but I doubt it. Are they gifted singers with great ranges? Yes. But they can't get as high as Perry, and they just might be able to get lower.

I'm not telling you who I prefer but I am arguing that singing abilities can't POSSIBLY be objective because we both have knowledge on these singers, yet we disagree on who has the better range and singing abilities.

It's because you seem to have a poor conception of what 'range', 'power', and 'control' is, and it's nothing to be ashamed of (I had no ****ing clue myself until I visited digitaldreamdoor). Range is the spectrum of notes. High notes, low notes, ect. Perry can go higher than Bolton, Groban, or Marx and he might be able to go just as low. Ergo, he'd have the better range. Control is the ability to maintain notes. Perry can maintain some of the most difficult, highest notes in the rock industry, whereas Marx hasn't exhibited the ability, and Groban and Bolton don't maintain high notes as well either. Power is the force behind notes. Here is where it could be close between Bolton and Groban and Perry, since the latter two -- especially Groban -- are trained opera singers.

But all in all? It's not that close.

Originally posted by Faunus
I'm really not about to go through every thread I've read in the past several days, but here's something from a thread I surfed today:

To which Glentract replies:

And you reply with a duh. There's more, as I'm sure aware of, but again, I'm not wasting time finding it.

I'm sure plenty of people here know who you are, and Illustrious has proven it irrefutably, td.

Hey, whatever helps you feel better about yourself. Go ahead and amuse me.

and besides this blaxican hydra character, who never contributes to debates, everybody knows who I am.

crylaugh

Just because I don't debate HERE, in this Star Wars section, doesn't mean my opinion doesn't mean anything, or things I say don't matter. Besides I have no doubt that if I actually engaged you in an argument over something that I'm highly knowledgeable about, I could debate in circles around you 😬

Originally posted by Gideon
Richard Marx versus Steve Perry? In range? Yes. It's a slaughter. Perry can hit higher notes -- by far (I'll link you to some songs) -- and he also lowered his range to hit baritone notes, which is Marx's general range. The only place that Perry can't hit is bass, but most professional vocalists can't anyways. Perry vs. Bolton? Again, Perry's head voice and falsetto is higher, clearer, and stronger than Bolton's. And Groban's. They might be able to go lower, but I doubt it. Are they gifted singers with great ranges? Yes. But they can't get as high as Perry, and they just might be able to get lower.

It's because you seem to have a poor conception of what 'range', 'power', and 'control' is, and it's nothing to be ashamed of (I had no ****ing clue myself until I visited digitaldreamdoor). Range is the spectrum of notes. High notes, low notes, ect. Perry can go higher than Bolton, Groban, or Marx and he might be able to go just as low. Ergo, he'd have the better range. Control is the ability to maintain notes. Perry can maintain some of the most difficult, highest notes in the rock industry, whereas Marx hasn't exhibited the ability, and Groban and Bolton don't maintain high notes as well either. Power is the force behind notes. Here is where it could be close between Bolton and Groban and Perry, since the latter two -- especially Groban -- are trained opera singers.

But all in all? It's not that close. [/B]

Originally posted by BlaxicanHydra
crylaugh

Just because I don't debate HERE, in this Star Wars section, doesn't mean my opinion doesn't mean anything, or things I say don't matter. Besides I have no doubt that if I actually engaged you in an argument over something that I'm highly knowledgeable about, I could debate in circles around you 😬

This is a matter of opinion which, with your credibility (or lack thereof), doesn't hold much water.

Credability here, you mean 😬

Try the Video game vs. if you'd like "credability". besides you shouldn't be talking about credability.