Thanos vs. Nam-Ek

Originally posted by Silent Master
If you have no stance, that means you don't disagree with me. thus there is no need for me to post anything.

I disagree because no evidence is posted.
I have no idea how durable a fictional metal is.
I'm not going to take your word without some proof.

You can continue to troll all you want but all you are doing is making claims without supporting them.

Disagreeing that Mjolnir is at least 100x more durable than tungsten is a stance and you earlier claimed to not have a stance. make up your mind.

Now, since you're back to having a stance. let's BZ.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Disagreeing that Mjolnir is at least 100x more durable than tungsten is a stance and you earlier claimed to not have a stance. make up your mind.

Now, since you're back to having a stance. let's BZ.

A BZ is where two people debate a vs style debate and where both offer evidence to support their side.

A negative (my stance) doesn't require evidence. It's automatically considered true unless proven otherwise. I wouldn't have anything to say other than it isn't.

So either you are going to prove this claim or it isn't true and Nam and Zod are still stronger.

It's a yes or no question, do you accept the battlezone?

Originally posted by Silent Master
It's a yes or no question, do you accept the battlezone?

Person1: "Mjolnir is more than 100x more durable than Tungsten"
Person2: "Oh really? Prove it."

Person1: "Do you want to BZ me over it?"
Person2: "What's to BZ?
Do you see how stupid person 1 is?

Originally posted by h1a8
I disagree because no evidence is posted.
I have no idea how durable a fictional metal is.
I'm not going to take your word without some proof.

You can continue to troll all you want but all you are doing is making claims without supporting them.

I wonder if h1 realizes how big a f*cking hypocrite he is considering he does literally this every single time. Disagree with or without evidence, then post his own bullshit logic which I might add never has any proof or evidence behind it. Then he trolls by continuing to make claims without supporting them. Yep, worst guy on kmc. At least Quan is a shit who does nothing but badmouth the other team and sing his owns praises so we know he's trolling on purpose.

The purpose of the BZ is so that you can't do your normal trolling in the form of either dismissing or lowballing the evidence. refusing the BZ is just proving to the entire board that you know I'll easily be able to prove my stance.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The purpose of the BZ is so that you can't do your normal trolling in the form of either dismissing or lowballing the evidence. refusing the BZ is just proving to the entire board that you know I'll easily be able to prove my stance.

This is not a BZ situation.
You are basically making a claim and I'm saying prove it.
Simple.

Originally posted by KingD19
I wonder if h1 realizes how big a f*cking hypocrite he is considering he does literally this every single time. Disagree with or without evidence, then post his own bullshit logic which I might add never has any proof or evidence behind it. Then he trolls by continuing to make claims without supporting them. Yep, worst guy on kmc. At least Quan is a shit who does nothing but badmouth the other team and sing his owns praises so we know he's trolling on purpose.

So what do you suggest I do? Accept the claim without an actual attempt to prove it?

I'll happily PM the evidence to a mod and have them rule on whether or not it meets the burden or I'll post it in a BZ where three judges can decide if it's enough to prove my stance.

Pick one.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I'll happily PM the evidence to a mod and have them rule on whether or not it meets the burden or I'll post it in a BZ where three judges can decide if it's enough to prove my stance.

Pick one.

You can do anything you like. Bottomline: The claim will always be dismissed unless valid evidence is brought to light.

You're a troll that ignores anything he doesn't like, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, what I'm doing is proving to the entire board that you know I'm right. if you actually thought I was wrong you would pick one of the two choices and when I failed to provide sufficient proof to the judges you would laugh and say, see I told you so.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You're a troll that ignores anything he doesn't like, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, what I'm doing is proving to the entire board that you know I'm right. if you actually thought I was wrong you would pick one of the two choices and when I failed to provide sufficient proof to the judges you would laugh and say, see I told you so.

If you don't want to convince me then no need to debate the issue at all.
I don't ignore valid reasoning. As evidence, I easily agreed with your first two points because they made perfect sense.

I have championed characters who I argued against for years after someone gave strong valid evidence. My track record speaks for itself. If I do not agree then the argument is not valid in some way.

Your track record states that you are both a troll and a liar and that you will low-ball or dismiss anything that hurts your side of the argument while massively exaggerating anything that will help you.

It's why you always refuse to do battle zones, because you know that your debating style would not hold up in a format where outside parties have the final say.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Your track record states that you are both a troll and a liar and that you will low-ball or dismiss anything that hurts your side of the argument while massively exaggerating anything that will help you.

It's why you always refuse to do battle zones, because you know that you're debating style would not hold up in a format where outside parties have the final say.

I disagree with all of that. I never troll and I have nevered lied on kmc. Ever!
I don't lowball either. All of you actually do that.

Like many people have said before, you believing something doesn't make it true. It just makes you delusional.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Like many people have said before, you believing something doesn't make it true. It just makes you delusional.

That can be said of anyone.
But as evidence shows I have accepted others arguments over my own many times and have admitted to being wrong multiple times.

You've claimed to have never lied, low-balled or trolled on these forums. Let's test that claim. Provide even one name of a poster who has been on the opposite side of a debate with you in multiple threads that will vouch that you have never lied or low-balled.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You've claimed to have never lied, low-balled or trolled on these forums. Let's test that claim. Provide even one name of a poster who has been on the opposite side of a debate with you in multiple threads that will vouch that you have never lied or low-balled.

Low balling is using the lowest showings as a representative when the character has performed contradictory better. Quran does this.

Robtard should vouch for me.
He knows that if I’m wrong then it’s not intentionally nor I purposely say false things to deceive people.

VaultDweller and Froth as well.

Then get them in here to vouch for you.