Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
I"ll continue the round, if for nothing else, it seems that I like my plan for this round better than the last. If we battle again, debunk my arguments with evidence or try with out the insults. I would never insult anyone's plans like that. And please don't act like any of you were just that Wonderful of debators when you first started tournies. This is my first one.
We never said anything to that affect. At this point, you're just putting words in our mouth, likely to try to fuel your antagonism toward the writeup more.
Originally posted by DigiMark007The logical flaws in a wide array of arguments surrounding the prep nonsense (from multiple teams) will be brought up and challenged by us as needed. But suffice it to say, we're looking forward to seeing what has been prepared for us, and if last round is any indication, seeing how silly it is. And if it’s the Amazo nonsense again, we all enjoying debunking porous BS, so it'll be a good time. I promised my teammates I wouldn't put anything specific about it in the writeup, because we all want to lay into the strategy, which has more logical holes than swiss cheese in a gunfight.
We never said anything to that affect. At this point, you're just putting words in our mouth, likely to try to fuel your antagonism toward the writeup more.
Notice SILLY, NONSENSE, POROUS BS, LOGICAL HOLES THANT SWISS CHEESE IN A GUNFIGHT. Nuff said. I've said my piece. Cool it on the insults.
Right. That's what we wrote. Not a word was directed personally, just at the plan, which we find to be flawed. In any case, people can read it on Warworld if they want.
And for what it's worth, the "silly" comment was intended to show amusement. I for one was delighted at the craziness of Round 1....some of it justified, other parts not so much, but entertaining. I would've like to see what would've happened if Trick had come through.
Quit trying to make it personal...it's hot-headedness like that that saps the fun out of tournaments, especially when no insult was intended.
Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirlWhat we said the strategies you used last battle were very flawed and had some BS in it.
The logical flaws in a wide array of arguments surrounding the prep nonsense (from multiple teams) will be brought up and challenged by us as needed. But suffice it to say, we're looking forward to seeing what has been prepared for us, and if last round is any indication, seeing how silly it is. And if it’s the Amazo nonsense again, we all enjoying debunking porous BS, so it'll be a good time. I promised my teammates I wouldn't put anything specific about it in the writeup, because we all want to lay into the strategy, which has more logical holes than swiss cheese in a gunfight.
It's a tourney we are trying to win. We are not gonna take it easy on you or hold back our tongue because you get offended. Now we won't insult you but any plan or strategy you use is free game. 😬
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Right. That's what we wrote. Not a word was directed personally, just at the plan, which we find to be flawed. In any case, people can read it on Warworld if they want.And for what it's worth, the "silly" comment was intended to show amusement. I for one was delighted at the craziness of Round 1....some of it justified, other parts not so much, but entertaining. I would've like to see what would've happened if Trick had come through.
Surely you realize that I knew who I was debating right? One doesn't argue the same for every opponent. As you are well aware of this round.
Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
Surely you realize that I knew who I was debating right? One doesn't argue the same for every opponent. As you are well aware of this round.
Of course we realize that, but some aspects of a plan also are used more than once.
And this sums it up nicely:
Originally posted by Newjak
What we said the strategies you used last battle were very flawed and had some BS in it.It's a tourney we are trying to win. We are not gonna take it easy on you or hold back our tongue because you get offended. Now we won't insult you but any plan or strategy you use is free game. 😬
Most teams/debaters would say the same, and intend no personal insult either, but won't go easy on a person's plans.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Of course we realize that, but some aspects of a plan also are used more than once.And this sums it up nicely:
Most teams/debaters would say the same, and intend no personal insult either, but won't go easy on a person's plans.
Politically correct for BS is "extrapolation". Anyone extrapolated so far in one thing or another. Wild extrapolations are integral part of the tourneys. Some teams just have fun busting those.
Originally posted by Charlotte DeBel
Wild extrapolations are integral part of the tourneys. Some teams just have fun busting those.
Nah, finding wild stuff that you can justify is an integral part of tourneys. Usually the win goes to who can think of the most powerful plan that isn't chicken scratch. Proof becomes key, not wild imagination.
...just ask Scoobless and I. Our plan(s) in the finals of the last partner tourney was, admittedly, mostly BS. We called out Blair/DC on some of theirs too, but they backed their plans up slightly more (or brought ours down more...one or the other) so they got the win. But it can be dangerous to imply the win goes to whoever has the craziest plan. That's rarely the case.
Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
There are certainly better ways to call someone out on the strategy besides calling it names. Simple evidence will suffice. And it wasn't tourney talk per say, it was how UGLY and insulting the op was.
Man, people do that all the time. I laid on Scoobs and Digi's strategy last time me and Blair fought against them like no tomorrow, and they aren't holding a grudge over it.
Right, guys?
...guys? 😕
Originally posted by DarkCrawler
Man, people do that all the time. I laid on Scoobs and Digi's strategy last time me and Blair fought against them like no tomorrow, and they aren't holding a grudge over it.Right, guys?
...guys? 😕
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Nah, finding wild stuff that you can justify is an integral part of tourneys. Usually the win goes to who can think of the most powerful plan that isn't chicken scratch. Proof becomes key, not wild imagination....just ask Scoobless and I. Our plan(s) in the finals of the last partner tourney was, admittedly, mostly BS. We called out Blair/DC on some of theirs too, but they backed their plans up slightly more (or brought ours down more...one or the other) so they got the win. But it can be dangerous to imply the win goes to whoever has the craziest plan. That's rarely the case.
I wasn't saying so. But a justification needs to be a justification, not the "justification". Leonidas summed it up nicely once.
It was double bite. Space Phantom vs ASS serum. DC\BW just managed to bite harder.
Originally posted by Charlotte DeBel
I wasn't saying so. But a justification needs to be a justification, not the "justification". Leonidas summed it up nicely once.It was double bite. Space Phantom vs ASS serum. DC\BW just managed to bite harder.
Yep, Space Phantom was much more important to their team then ASS (tee-hee!) serum was for us. ✅