Thanos vs. WW, Aquaman and Cyborg

Originally posted by h1a8
You are an idiot. A person can be bad for multiple reasons. That doesn't make one of the reasons irrelevant, it just adds to the perception.

It's loaded because of A, B, and C together.

There is no strawmannable point in your statement beyond “pure”. The “loaded” is irrelevant and a red herring as that is not the lie I am pointing to at this time.

See? This is bait #2 in the h1 troll-repertoire. Toss in an insult to try and push the debate into a different direction.

Your weak attempt at covering up your lie is noted.

I will let the board be the judge of this as you obviously will never admit to your lie. Facts are all here after all.

Liar.

Originally posted by h1a8
I didnt. I demanded them from you.
I already explained multiple times that it's Damn near impossible to articulate. Therefore showing Cap doing it was the only way for you.

Even if true, That wouldn't make it any better. why demand specific feats from anyone, when

Originally posted by h1a8
2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character.

Every single thread that H1 is involved in erodes into the same garbage thats going on here. Its every single one.

Here is proof that h1's demand for specific feats was based on Nib's argument.

Originally posted by h1a8
Nowhere did Cap tackle someone to the ground or even tackle someone period.

It's the combination NIB was arguing.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Here is proof that h1's demand for specific feats was based on Nib's argument.

I never argued against this. Posting true statements doesn't hurt my case.
I stated I demanded them from you.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Even if true, That wouldn't make it any better. why demand specific feats from anyone, when

My statement holds true depending on if it can be articulated properly. I gave a general rule and not a rule for every case. In this case it had to be shown.

I hope you're not saying that the demand for specific feats was solely aimed at me, as that would mean it wasn't about having a debate, it was about trolling.

So, was the demand to everyone or have you been trolling this whole time?

Originally posted by Silent Master
I hope you're not saying that the demand for specific feats was solely aimed at me, as that would mean it wasn't about having a debate, it was about trolling.

So, was the demand to everyone or have you been trolling this whole time?

Originally posted by h1a8
It was from you since you were claiming that it was in Cap's character. No one else was.

I wasn't the only one claiming it was in-character for Cap, so if the demand was aimed solely at me, that means it wasn't about a debate. it was about trolling.

Thanks for admitting that you've been trolling this entire time.

Edit: Plus, seeing as in general you don't think specific feats are needed to prove in-character. that is just further proof that you weren't interested in a debate.

Originally posted by h1a8
2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I wasn't the only one claiming it was in-character for Cap, so if the demand was aimed solely at me, that means it wasn't about a debate. it was about trolling.

Thanks for admitting that you've been trolling this entire time.

Edit: Plus, seeing as in general you don't think specific feats are needed to prove in-character. that is just further proof that you weren't interested in a debate.

To be honest. I don't remember demanding feats from anyone. I simply stated that it it was OOC. You volunteered to give examples to prove otherwise.

Originally posted by h1a8
To be honest. I don't remember demanding feats from anyone. I simply stated that it it was OOC. You volunteered to give examples to prove otherwise.

Making claims and then demanding the other side refute them, is asking for feats. unless you're claiming that you can refute someone's argument without providing proof.

Is that your claim?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Making claims and then demanding the other side refute them, is asking for feats. unless you're claiming that you can refute someone's argument without providing proof.

Is that your claim?

Again. I didn't demand anything. I simply made a statement. You were trying to prove the statement wrong on your own accord.

Originally posted by h1a8
Again. I didn't demand anything. I simply made a statement. You were trying to prove the statement wrong on your own accord.

Wrong, according to you, if someone doesn't disprove your claims. that means you win. so yes, you're demanding either a person refute your argument or concede.

I addressed your post. My last post explains everything. It's up to you to rebut it now. Failure results in a concession. I have nothing new to say.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Wrong, according to you, if someone doesn't disprove your claims. that means you win. so yes, you're demanding either a person refute your argument or concede.

I didn't make the initial claim, Nib did. I stated the claim was false. You tried to prove the claim was true.

Originally posted by h1a8
I didn't make the initial claim, Nib did. I stated the claim was false. You tried to prove the claim was true.

So what you're saying is that, since you didn't refute Nib's claim. then you conceded.

After all, Nib addressed your post, his response explains how Cap wins, so it was up to you to rebut it. Failure results in a concession

I addressed your post. My last post explains everything. It's up to you to rebut it now. Failure results in a concession. I have nothing new to say.

Originally posted by Silent Master
So what you're saying is that, since you didn't refute Nib's claim. then you conceded.

After all, Nib addressed your post, his response explains how Cap wins, so it was up to you to rebut it. Failure results in a concession

I rebutted it as I stated it was OOC. That's a rebuttal.

Originally posted by h1a8
I rebutted it as I stated it was OOC. That's a rebuttal.

Only, it wasn't out of character which means your rebuttal failed. So that brings us back to you didn't refute his argument, thus per your rules. You conceded.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Only, it wasn't out of character which means your rebuttal failed. So that brings us back to you didn't refute his argument, thus per your rules. You conceded.

Duh. I accepted his claim the moment he mentioned the Batroc feat. It's definitely in Cap's character to tackle someone to the ground.

Originally posted by h1a8
Duh. I accepted his claim the moment he mentioned the Batroc feat. It's definitely in Cap's character to tackle someone to the ground.

Then why are you continuing to claim that you refuted his argument, you didn't.

But that also brings us nicely back to the fact that nib had to post a very specific feat in order for you to admit that you were wrong. Yet according to you.

Originally posted by h1a8
2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character.

So why the double standard, why does Captain America require specific feats but Wonder Woman doesn't?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Then why are you continuing to claim that you refuted his argument, you didn't.

But that also brings us nicely back to the fact that nib had to post a very specific feat in order for you to admit that you were wrong. Yet according to you.

So why the double standard, why does Captain America require specific feats but Wonder Woman doesn't?

I gave a rebuttal not a refuttal. Why would I say I refuted his argument when I conceded right away? You make 0 sense.

I posted this. You must have missed it.

Originally posted by h1a8

My statement holds true depending on if it can be articulated properly. I gave a general rule and not a rule for every case. In this case it had to be shown.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rebutting
b: to expose the falsity of : REFUTE
_______________________

Now that we've dealt with your silly attempt at semantics. Why the double standard in regards to Captain America and Wonder Woman