Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

Originally posted by WO Polaski
so you don't have any actual reasoning for why it doesn't involve any skill. You're just making broad statements. And I'm the one deflecting? Feel free to explain why what I do doesn't involve aiming. You've failed twice so far with your little strawman.

This has nothing to do with what I've said.

Interesting dynamic. What type of rifle do you use?

I haven't used a strawman tactic because I haven't misrepresented you in any way. So I can only presume you're just another in the long line of people who've heard the use of the term "strawman" and are using it incorrectly.

Yes, you're the one that's deflecting. I'm keeping the discussion about your claims...which you instigated. You're the one who tried to "deflect" it back to me.

Regardless. I've made my point and my opinion still holds and, in my opinion, is valid. Made all the more valid by your initial statement about missing a lot.

But on we go.

Usually I'll use the M21 and on more confined maps i'll use the G3 with either an ACOG or a red dot scope depending on what's most suitable. Neither of those 2 have a particularly large amount of power but with stopping power they both do the job. 1 shot kills on hardcore for the most part although sometimes I'll use UAV jammer instead.

Originally posted by jaden101
I haven't used a strawman tactic because I haven't misrepresented you in any way. So I can only presume you're just another in the long line of people who've heard the use of the term "strawman" and are using it incorrectly.

taking one portion of my argument and using it as the basis and then ignoring the rest, is a strawman.

Yes, you're the one that's deflecting. I'm keeping the discussion about your claims...which you instigated. You're the one who tried to "deflect" it back to me.

this isn't a debate i can ask you questions whenever I feel.

Regardless. I've made my point and my opinion still holds and, in my opinion, is valid. Made all the more valid by your initial statement about missing a lot.

well, you're entitled to your opinion, but in my opinion, you don't know what you're talking about.

Usually I'll use the M21 and on more confined maps i'll use the G3 with either an ACOG or a red dot scope depending on what's most suitable. Neither of those 2 have a particularly large amount of power but with stopping power they both do the job. 1 shot kills on hardcore for the most part although sometimes I'll use UAV jammer instead.

Interesting. My quarrel with the ACOG scope is that it takes longer to go into (when you aim) then it does with the red dot or regular iron sights. i take it from that you prefer ranged fighting more then up-close then, I.E. shotsguns, SMG's etc?

Originally posted by WO Polaski
taking one portion of my argument and using it as the basis and then ignoring the rest, is a strawman.

It is by some interpretations of the term.

I would know, I debate in the SWVF.

Would you like mt to explain teh burdon of proof?

I know what the burden of proof is and a strawman is.

So no.

Well you're clearly not compeltely familiar with every single interpretation of the straw man argument.

Originally posted by Fei Fong Wong
It is by some interpretations of the term.

Yes, by wrong interpretations of the term.

Would you like mt to explain teh burdon of proof?

No...We'd like you to go away.

well, you're entitled to your opinion, but in my opinion, you don't know what you're talking about.

Well I guess our opinions will just have to differ. You think your technique involves skill. I don't.

Interesting. My quarrel with the ACOG scope is that it takes longer to go into (when you aim) then it does with the red dot or regular iron sights. i take it from that you prefer ranged fighting more then up-close then, I.E. shotsguns, SMG's etc?

True about the ACOG...The G3 is the only weapon I think suits it because it's a very stable weapon with little kick so even when someone is relatively close you can still keep them in your sight when firing. I would never put one on any of the other battle rifles for the opposite reason.

Yeah generally I'll choose to snipe if possible just out of preference. Obviously some maps don't lend themselves to it too well though.

I'll generally work through the challenges for the weapons using sniper and battle rifles 1st then move onto SMG's and LMG's and mostly just leave the shotgun challenges unless i'm cheating on cage match headshots to get my score and challenges completed.

Absolutely not, the basis for the interpretation would be that if you only address an insignificant aspect of your opponent's argument and make it out to be fundamental to their point then you're misrepresenting their overall position.

As I said, I'm a SWVF debator, I wouldn't go there if i wer you.

The most gifted minds on these boards reside in the SWFV.

Go away pathetic sock.

Are you that Nebaris bloke I have heard about?

If so, SWVF's debating credibility or not aside, they don't even take you seriously there. And since you're a sock, really no one here takes you seriously.

And the Strawman debating fallacy is when you basically corrupt the point of the poster's argument into something different, not focusing on one specific point of the argument to invalidate the whole thing. That is picking at straws, it is often confused with the strawman argument because of what it is called.

Yes. 😄

Focusing on something insignificant alone is grasping at straws, yeah, but when you assert that the insignificant aspect you just addressed is a fundamental aspect of the argument, it comes into the territory of misrepresentation.

Gideon, who's basically the king of the SWVF, all but hero worships me.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Gideon
Nebaris and I disagree all the damn time, but I don't hesitate to point out that he has a gifted mind.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Gideon
Though, I will give Nebaris credit for milking every "loophole" he can access to try to defy canon. He'd make a decent lawyer, I'd wager.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Gideon
I appreciate the contributions, [Nebaris]. As ever, you are a skilled debater.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Gideon
Now, eventually, we managed to convince the rest of the forum about Palpatine's status as the most powerful Sith Lord and this cabal abdicated the forums entirely. But this new user, known as Nebaris (it was his first username) has been repeatedly been banned for being a sock after his original account was removed for rule breaking. Now, he's clearly very intelligent, but has taken the role of "devil's advocate" to a new extreme.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Gideon
Nebaris has the advantage in that he is actually considerably intelligent.

You can use the search button to verify the legitimacy of the quotes.

Originally posted by KCOS
Focusing on something insignificant alone is grasping at straws, yeah, but when you assert that the insignificant aspect you just addressed is a fundamental aspect of the argument, it comes into the territory of misrepresentation.

Since when is grasping at straws even the same thing as a strawman argument?

Are you an idiot?

Go back to the star wars v forum and stop clogging up the decent boards with your banal blabberings.

lmao 😂

You literally just commited a straw man. I never said they were the same thing now did I?

Focusing on something insignificant alone is grasping at straws, yeah, but when you assert that the insignificant aspect you just addressed is a fundamental aspect of the argument, it comes into the territory of misrepresentation.

What I put in bold would represent the difference.

Originally posted by NOESOEB
lmao 😂

You literally just commited a straw man. I never said they were the same thing now did I?

Focusing on something insignificant alone is grasping at straws, yeah, [b]but when you assert that the insignificant aspect you just addressed is a fundamental aspect of the argument, it comes into the territory of misrepresentation.

What I put in bold would represent the difference. [/B]

So have you just given up on accusing me of using a strawman argument against WO Polaski then?

Wow...You're debating skills really are good.

*cough*