Originally posted by dadudemon
^^^^"Why are you ignoring these?"^^^^
You're being obstinate and just repeating things ad nasuem. Anime versus board culture does not use manga and anime in conjunction unless specified it's manga only. This isn't a rule I "Made up"and it's not "my agenda" because I agree with you. You've been repeating that this is my rule or my agenda. When I've stated several times that it's board culture.
Originally posted by Classic NES
You're being obstinate and just repeating things ad nasuem. Anime versus board culture does not use manga and anime in conjunction unless specified it's manga only. This isn't a rule I "Made up"and it's not "my agenda" because I agree with you. You've been repeating that this is my rule or my agenda. When I've stated several times that it's board culture.
"There is no default: it is open to both the anime and manga. You are not the OP so you do not get to create rules for this thread."
"Additionally, the 8th rule makes it clear:
"8. This is character vs., not actually "anime vs. anime" versus." So it doesn't have to be specific to just manga vs. manga or anime vs. anime: it is just character. That leaves lots of lateral movement from the OP in thread creations. Opening line from the rules also states:
"This forum is Anime/Manga Versus..."
It doesn't' state, "manga canon-only versions"."
"...the rules clearly allow both anime and manga and makes a distinction that we use the characters and don't have to keep it anime anime or manga manga. It is up the OP, not you. OP did not specify, therefore, all are fairgame..."
Originally posted by NemeBro
If you want to use the DBZ anime, Super Saiyan Goku gets hurt by elephants and pebbles, and Goku and Piccolo combined struggle to lift a bus.Don't use it, seriously.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Well no, I think [those] feat[s are] bullshit outlier[s]. [They are] an incredibly low showing[s], but it doesn't detract from a history of kicking people through islands or destroying mountains with punches.
Originally posted by Classic NES
Told you I didn't make up the rule dadudemon.
Ugh.
I'm going to start quoting my posts at you again if you keep talking in circles.
You made up that rule for this forum specifically because you did not want to have to deal with the results in this thread. Once I pointed out where you were wrong (and you could not find it in the rules, as well), you decided to back-peddle and then say it was an internet culture thing. You can change the goalposts to be about some sort of over-arching internet culture, all you want: that's not only a strawman, that's irrelevant.
Here's the quote:
"But, if you have to use the argument "it wasn't in the manga" or "it wasn't in the anime", then it shows you are hiding behind rules rather than staying in the spirit of a character vs. matchup. Rule hiding just to win an argument is lame, imo.
There are plenty of other things to talk about other than using "nope, only can use the manga" or "nope, can only use the anime" as points of contention. OP didn't specify: we are stuck with both. You can make your own thread and specify which sources you want to use for your matchup, though: that's not against the rules."
Originally posted by dadudemonI read the manga, it has been a million years since I last watched the later episodes of the anime.
How fast Gotenks flew around earth, Pan's speed as a toddler, bla bla bla. You should definitely know these things if you consider yourself a fan of DB.
Also you forgot one: King Vegeta casually blowing up three planets with one blast. estahuh
Originally posted by dadudemon
You made up that rule for this forum specifically because you did not want to have to deal with the results in this thread.
Two seperate posters have echoed the same sentiments. Yet, you continue to assert that I made this rule up?
Originally posted by dadudemon
Once I pointed out where you were wrong (and you could not find it in the rules, as well), you decided to back-peddle and then say it was an internet culture thing.
Why would two seperate posters echo the same sentiment if it wasn't a common practice?
Originally posted by NemeBro
I read the manga, it has been a million years since I last watched the later episodes of the anime.
Same here. Stop smoking so much weed. uhuh
Originally posted by NemeBro
Also you forgot one: King Vegeta casually blowing up three planets with one blast. estahuh
I don't remember that, at all. 😐
Originally posted by Classic NES
Two seperate posters have echoed the same sentiments.
That's not true. Additionally, that's a logical fallacy: argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy.
Originally posted by Classic NES
Yet, you continue to assert that I made this rule up?
"There is no default: it is open to both the anime and manga. You are not the OP so you do not get to create rules for this thread."
"Additionally, the 8th rule makes it clear:
"8. This is character vs., not actually "anime vs. anime" versus." So it doesn't have to be specific to just manga vs. manga or anime vs. anime: it is just character. That leaves lots of lateral movement from the OP in thread creations. Opening line from the rules also states:
"This forum is Anime/Manga Versus..."
It doesn't' state, "manga canon-only versions"."
"...the rules clearly allow both anime and manga and makes a distinction that we use the characters and don't have to keep it anime anime or manga manga. It is up the OP, not you. OP did not specify, therefore, all are fairgame..."
Originally posted by Classic NES
Why would two seperate posters echo the same sentiment if it wasn't a common practice?
Not true. Additionally, that's a logical fallacy: argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy.
Originally posted by dadudemon
That's not true.
This is a blatant lie:
Originally posted by NemeBroDon't use it, seriously.
Originally posted by Lek Kuen
most people don't accept the anime as evidence at all hence his view.
Originally posted by dadudemon
argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy
I thought you stated that it's not true that other people chimed in. So, how could I have appealed to popularity if no one agree'd with the manga only [unless stated] policy according to you? Which is it: Am I alone making up this rule or am I appealing to popularity. Because It can't be both.
Originally posted by Classic NES
This is a blatant lie:
No, what you tried to do was overt dishonesty and borders on trolling.
Neither one of them said the following or something that means the exact same thing:
"Anime versus board culture does not use manga and anime in conjunction unless specified it's manga only."
That quote is yours. 🙂
And, let's make it clear that you did properly represent my perspective, above, in the quote. Good on you for not committing a strawman.
Originally posted by Classic NES
I thought you stated that it's not true that other people chimed in. So, how could I have appealed to popularity if no one agree'd with the manga only [unless stated] policy according to you? Which is it: Am I alone making up this rule or am I appealing to popularity. Because It can't be both.
Your argument does not have to be valid in order for one to point out the argument itself is a logical fallacy. But, at this point, you're just reaching.
Also, what you just did above was create another logical fallacy. It is called the "false dilemma".
Originally posted by dadudemon
No, what you tried to do was overt dishonesty
No, that's what you're doing.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Neither one of them said the following or something that means the exact same thing:
This is an example of hardcore intellectual dishonesty on your part. Both persons stated that anime version isn't used just like I did. A person doesn't have to repeat what I said ad verbatim to echo my sentiments I.E. you're lying.
Originally posted by dadudemonYour argument does not have to be valid in order for one to point out the argument itself is a logical fallacy.
So, you basically admit that your argument was invalid. Cool.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Also, what you just did above was create another logical fallacy. It is called the "false dilemma".
First of that's a Fallacy Fallacy.
That's not a false dilemma because you contradicted yourself. The second law of the three laws of logic is the law of non contradiction. You can't argue that I'm making up said rule and then say I'm making an appeal to popularity by appealing to said rule. Former statement implies that there is no such a rule in exsistance while the later implies there is such a rule which I support through appeal to popularity. So, which is it? Is there or is there not a rule?
Originally posted by Classic NES
No, that's what you're doing.
No, what you tried to do was overt dishonesty because neither one of them said the following or something that means the exact same thing: "Anime versus board culture does not use manga and anime in conjunction unless specified it's manga only."
Originally posted by Classic NES
This is an example of hardcore intellectual dishonesty on your part. Both persons stated that anime version isn't used just like I did. A person doesn't have to repeat what I said ad verbatim to echo my sentiments I.E. you're lying.
"No, what you tried to do was overt dishonesty and borders on trolling.
Neither one of them said the following or something that means the exact same thing:
'Anime versus board culture does not use manga and anime in conjunction unless specified it's manga only.'
That quote is yours."
Originally posted by Classic NES
So, you basically admit that your argument was invalid. Cool.
No, "Your argument does not have to be valid in order for one to point out the argument itself is a logical fallacy."
Originally posted by Classic NES
First of that's a Fallacy Fallacy.
lol!
Originally posted by Classic NES
That's not a false dilemma because you contradicted yourself.
Wrong and here's why:
"[An] argument does not have to be valid in order for one to point out the argument itself is a logical fallacy."
That was in response to this:
"I thought you stated that it's not true that other people chimed in. So, how could I have appealed to popularity if no one agree'd with the manga only [unless stated] policy according to you? Which is it..."
You then created a false dilemma by stating the following: "Am I alone making up this rule or am I appealing to popularity. Because It can't be both."
When those are the only two choices you've given when, in fact, there is another option: one can still point out a logical fallacy in an argument without having to even remotely come close to addressing the facts in the argument itself.
Wish you would have gotten that point because I didn't want to explain it. 🙁
Originally posted by Classic NES
The second law of the three laws of logic is the law of non contradiction. You can't argue that I'm making up said rule and then say I'm making an appeal to popularity by appealing to said rule.
What you just did here is called a logical fallacy: it's called the strawman. You have improperly represented my argument and then argued against that malformed argument.
You tried to use a logical fallacy to support your position: I called you out on it. Prior to that, I showed you where you were lying to support your point.
Both are independent criticisms of your actions: they do not rely on each other nor did I pass them off as such.
Originally posted by Classic NES
Former statement implies that there is no such a rule in exsistance...
Actually, it doesn't because "you tried to use a logical fallacy to support your position: I called you out on it. Prior to that, I showed you where you were lying to support your point. Both are independent criticisms of your actions: they do not rely on each other nor did I pass them off as such."
Originally posted by Classic NES
while the later implies there is such a rule which I support through appeal to popularity.
Actually, it doesn't. The latter functions as an independent criticisms of your actions: it does not rely on on the factual incorrectness of the statements in the argument to function as a statement of fallacy on your part.
Originally posted by Classic NES
So, which is it? Is there or is there not a rule?
That's a logical fallacy: you are now moving the goalposts.
You, once before, properly represented my argument. But now you want to argue something I have not been arguing.
Here, let's remind you of your own words and understanding of my side of the argument:
""Anime versus board culture does not use manga and anime in conjunction[;] unless specified[,] it's manga only."
Punctuation added for readability but those are your original words.
So, would you like to:
1. Stick with both your factually incorrect statement about having supporters while also committing the logical fallacy of argumentum ad populum?
or
2. Would you like to go back to moving the goalposts?
or
3. The third option where you concede the following which I pointed out, earlier:
"But, if you have to use the argument "it wasn't in the manga" or "it wasn't in the anime", then it shows you are hiding behind rules rather than staying in the spirit of a character vs. matchup. Rule hiding just to win an argument is lame, imo.
There are plenty of other things to talk about other than using "nope, only can use the manga" or "nope, can only use the anime" as points of contention. OP didn't specify: we are stuck with both. You can make your own thread and specify which sources you want to use for your matchup, though: that's not against the rules."
Originally posted by dadudemon
No, what you tried to do was overt dishonesty because neither one of them said the following or something that means the exact same thing: "Anime versus board culture does not use manga and anime in conjunction unless specified it's manga only.""No, what you tried to do was overt dishonesty and borders on trolling.
Neither one of them said the following or something that means the exact same thing:
'Anime versus board culture does not use manga and anime in conjunction unless specified it's manga only.'
That quote is yours."
And I repeat:
This is an example of hardcore intellectual dishonesty on your part. Both persons stated that anime version isn't used just like I did. A person doesn't have to repeat what I said ad verbatim to echo my sentiments I.E. you're lying.
Originally posted by dadudemonNo, "[b]Your
argument does not have to be valid in order for one to point out the argument itself is a logical fallacy."Wrong and here's why:
"[An] argument does not have to be valid in order for one to point out the argument itself is a logical fallacy."
[/B]
So, which one is it?
Is it "your [my] argument does not have to be valid"
Or
"[An] argument does not have to be valid"
Is the argument exclusively my argument or is it just AN argument?
Originally posted by dadudemonWhen those are the only two choices you've given when, in fact, there is another option: one can still point out a logical fallacy in an argument without having to even remotely come close to addressing the facts in the argument itself.
Except that the fallacy you used already makes the choice for you. If it's an appeal to popularity that means you believe that the rule exists and I'm supporting it through an appeal to popularity. Otherwise how could a rule that doesn't exists be supported by popularity?
Originally posted by dadudemon
What you just did here is called a logical fallacy: it's called the strawman. You have improperly represented my argumentYou tried to use a logical fallacy to support your position:
Actually, it doesn't because "you tried to use a logical fallacy to support your position: I called you out on it. Prior to that, I showed you where you were lying to support your point. Both are independent criticisms of your actions: they do not rely on each other nor did I pass them off as such."
Your argument is that I made up a rule and now you're claiming that I'm appealing to popularity over a rule I made up. How could a rule that doesn't exists be popular?
Originally posted by dadudemon
Prior to that, I showed you where you were lying to support your point.
Actually, I showed that you were ignoring the quotes. 🙂
Originally posted by dadudemon
Both are independent criticisms of your actions: they do not rely on each other nor did I pass them off as such.Actually, it doesn't. The latter functions as an independent criticisms of your actions: it does not rely on on the factual incorrectness of the statements in the argument to function as a statement of fallacy on your part.
This is nonsense. Both criticism are about the exsistance and popularity of a rule. One supports the other, I cannot be guilty of both making up a rule that doesn't exist but is simultaneously popular. That's a contradiction.
Originally posted by dadudemon
That's a logical fallacy: you are now moving the goalposts.
Fallacy fallacy again
First it was a false dilemma now it's moving the goal post. Even though, it's the same question I made earlier repeated ad naseum.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I have not been arguing.
I remind you again that you claimed that I "made up" the rule.
Originally posted by dadudemon
So, would you like to:1. Stick with both your factually incorrect statement about having supporters while also committing the logical fallacy of argumentum ad populum?
Which is impossible.
Because once again: I cannot be guilty of both making up a rule that doesn't exist but is popular. That's a contradiction.
Originally posted by dadudemon2. Would you like to go back to moving the goalposts?
Which earlier according to you was a false dilemma.
Originally posted by dadudemon
3. The third option where you concede the following which I pointed out, earlier:"But, if you have to use the argument "it wasn't in the manga" or "it wasn't in the anime", then it shows you are hiding behind rules rather than staying in the spirit of a character vs. matchup. Rule hiding just to win an argument is lame, imo.
Your not reading my post at all.
I conceded that you were right and that I was hiding behind rules. I repeat: I conceded that you were right and I was hiding behind rules.
Now here's the kicker: How can I be hiding behind a rule that doesn't exist and was made up by me?