5/13/2013 11:44 AM
It's not. It's 11 times as long as it needs to be, as shown in my example.

I'll determine how long my own posts need to be.

They are A BIT word on occasion because I respond to what others say. If others ask the same questions or say the same things, naturally they'll get the same response. That's a function of their posts, as I'm merely responding.
Can you imagine if I argued the same way you do, in arguing with you?  By taking apart every sentence and giving the same response? Holy ****.

Every response I give is different unless I'm responding to the same question or point.

Apparently people saying the same things don't bother you unless it's me responding the same way to those same things, and then suddenly you have a huge problem with it.

5/13/2013 11:47 AM
People saying the same things throughout an argument in different posts is different than what you do.  As in "But as I said, that makes no sense because..."  I stopped arguing for this reason; we were going around in circles.

Saying the same thing over and over in 1 post is silly.  Dare I say, illogical.
5/13/2013 11:53 AM
People saying the same things throughout an argument in different posts is different than what you do.

Yes. The difference is I'm responding to what they have to say.

You want to blame me for saying the same thing when all I'm doing is responding to what others say. You're being patently ridiculous.
Saying the same thing over and over in 1 post is silly.  Dare I say, illogical.

Perhaps I should just make one response and refer people back to it. But then, I'd have to keep making references hundreds of times, because most of these people don't bring up anything new.
5/13/2013 12:14 PM
Is this the proper way to have an debate?
 

Classic symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder.

Or perhaps its just someone telling you a truth you can't handle, so you have to try to find some way to pass it off as something else.

  • It’s your truth, not mine.  As I said before, I don’t believe the “truth” you preach to be true.



You've chosen the ever-popular "you must have a psychological issue so I'll pretend to be Dr. Freud and do an internet diagnosis" route.

  • People are just trying to figure out why you act the way you do.  They’re just speculating.

Seriously, when you're desperately trying to deny the truth in what I'm saying, at least try to be more original.  

  • As I said, it’s your truth, not mine.


He doesn't even get that his arguments are illogical and full of the same fallacies he accuses everyone else of making

If this were true, you'd be able to point out the fallacies, as I have done when others commit them. Yet you haven't been able to do that, because all you want is to make wild accusations with nothing to back them up.

  • I have made this argument already, you’ve chosen to dismiss them.

In this case, his argument is based on a cornerstone assumption that homosexuality is a choice, determined by who one chooses as sexual partners.

I established this as fact based on logical reasoning a long time ago, therefore it isn't an assumption. Try again.

  • As stated earlier, what is “logical” to you doesn’t necessary mean it’s correct.

Homosexuality is not a choice, it's a biological fact.

Not only have you NOT established this through any reasonable argument, as I already pointed out, a reasonable argument to the contrary HAS been established (by me). 

  • I have established an argument on why I believe this to be true, as I said earlier.



So if you want to argue this position, you've got a lot of work to do.

  • I’ve already done the work.

Then again, who are we kidding, both of us already know you won't even try.

  • I’ve already done this.

Once again, all you want is to argue a position with nothing to establish it. 

  • I’ve already established it.



Michael Jackson may have been able to make himself appear to be a weird-looking white guy to someone who had no idea who he was, but it doesn't mean he was white.  He was still genetically black.

And we've also already debunked the idea that race and sexuality are comparable. You're many pages behind in this thread. Might want to go back and read for a while.

  • You haven’t debunked anything, as I believe sexuality is based on attraction.  As I stated many pages ago.  You might want to go back and read for a while.

In addition to being a horribly fallacious argument, it demonstrates a massive lack of empathy. 

First, let's clear up the idea that it's fallacious.

  • It is.

You haven't made a single step to show it as such other than you stating you believe it to be true, which means nothing.

  • Yes I have.

When you want to come into a topic and make declarations against already established positions, you'd better be prepared to make your own arguments.

  • I have.

You haven't done anything of the sort,

  • Yes I have.

so until you do,

  • I have.

nothing you say regarding my argument can be taken seriously in even the most remote way.

  • Whether you take my argument seriously is up to you, I suppose.


Second, empathy isn't part of the argument, and people are entitled to feel however they wish.

  • I’m making it part of the argument.

If you want to create a thread to discuss empathy, or empathy and sexuality, feel free to do so.

  • Thanks!

Otherwise, stop trying to distract from the fact that you have what amounts to a lot of posturing and a non-argument and no real challenge to my position.

  • I’ve made an argument against your position.

Sure, now you can "choose" to be homosexual by picking male sexual and civil partners.  But that wouldn't make you gay.  We know for a fact you are VERY opposed to being mistaken for a homosexual.

Actually, choosing to pick male partners WOULD make me gay. It doesn't matter if I'm opposed to being mistaken for a homosexual. 

  • That’s your opinion.  I’ve argued that’s not true.

 

Here's a logical way to disprove what you're saying:

I'm also opposed to being mistaken for a criminal. However, if I choose to commit a series of crimes, I would be a criminal regardless of my opposition to being classified as one.

  • The counterpoint to the analogy has already been discussed.

 

By the same reasoning, it also doesn't matter how opposed I am to being considering homosexual - if I take homosexual action, I am one regardless of how I feel.

  • You’ve said this a few times.  I’ve argued that’s not true.

BTW, I started mentioning Narcissistic personality disorders or gradiose-type personality disorders many months ago now..

Yes, it's a classic defense mechanism when someone with better debate skills completely lays waste to what you thought was a well-reasoned argument. 

  • You don’t have better defense skills.  I actually think you may have a Narcissistic personality disorder.


"Well, uh, you must be crazy and here is my personal diagnosis since I'm infinitely qualified to do that over the internet even though people with real qualifications sometimes can't do it in person."

  • Yes.



Hilarious.

  • I’m happy you find it funny.

Keep it coming.

  • OK.

Next you'll respond by repeating the fallacy that since people posting here agree with you, then you must be right.

  • Nobody said that.

The same predictable defense mechanisms all the time.

  • Yes, you’ve mentioned this.

Somehow it never gets old knowing my skills can reduce people to these pathetic tactics.

  • False.  People are making fun of you because it’s fun and they don’t feel like arguing anymore.

Bistiza, have you even considered the possibility that the reason we're considering what psychiatric disorders are most likely afflicting you is not, as you are so convinced, because we don't like having our beliefs challenged by your irrefutable logic?

No, because that's EXACTLY what it is.

  • You say it, so it must be true.  Right?

As I just said, it's a classic defense mechanism used by those who realize they can't argue effectively in any legitimate manner. 

  • Yes, you say this a lot.




5/13/2013 12:15 PM
I stopped about halfway through your last essay.  This isn't the right way to have a debate about something.  So while it's not on you to make an argument easier to have, if you want a legit debate you should do it in a better way so people may be willing to argue with you.
5/13/2013 1:15 PM
Christ, burnsy, he's trolling you hard. Everyone knows he's a retarded troll that has never won an argument here. Even bis knows it. He's just baiting you into giving him attention.
5/13/2013 1:58 PM
It’s your truth, not mine.  As I said before, I don’t believe the “truth” you preach to be true.

The truth is the truth - there is no "your" or "mine".

Not believing the truth is called denial.

It's fine if you want to be in denial, but it now appears as though you're going beyond that - you're in denial about being in denial. That's quite a feat, and sad too.
People are just trying to figure out why you act the way you do.  They’re just speculating.

I merely argue and defend the positions I take. There is nothing more to it than that.

And as I've said before, speculating or assuming anything is a bad idea in general and especially when it comes to me. Maybe if you want to know something you should ask rather than throwing out defense mechanisms and then trying to say "I was just trying to figure out..." as an excuse for it.
As I said, it’s your truth, not mine.


And as I said, there is no such thing as "your" and "mine" when it comes to truth. It is what it is.  You're simply in denial.
I have made this argument already, you’ve chosen to dismiss them.

No. You made the argument, I showed how it doesn't work, and you gave up.
As stated earlier, what is “logical” to you doesn’t necessary mean it’s correct.


Logical is another word that isn't arbitrary.  There is no "to you" or "to me" about it. That's simply you trying to change the way logic works because it isn't on your side, but it doesn't work that way.
I have established an argument on why I believe this to be true, as I said earlier.

And I debunked that argument through logical reasoning, showing how it is based upon propaganda and isn't true. You came back and said "it is true" and offered nothing else as reasons or evidence as to why. The argument ended with you in denial about what logical reasoning had to say for your position (hint: your position wasn't supported by logical reasoning).
I’ve already established it.

Is this really the problem? That you somehow don't get that your argument was debunked?

Then let's make it clear: Your argument was debunked. You established nothing. You'll have to try again or you've got nothing.
You haven’t debunked anything, as I believe sexuality is based on attraction.  As I stated many pages ago.  You might want to go back and read for a while.

Your belief that sexuality is based on attraction is exactly what was debunked. You can live in denial and believe whatever you want, but please stop trying to argue from a debunked position.
Yes I have.

With what? A debunked position? Try again or stop insisting you've done things you haven't done.
I’m making it part of the argument.

Have fun arguing with yourself, because it's not a part of this topic, so I wont' be having that argument here.
I’ve made an argument against your position.


And it was debunked. That means you have to try again or you've got no argument.
That’s your opinion.  I’ve argued that’s not true.

No, it's a fact. We've been over this - logical reasoning says its a fact, while your BS propaganda says otherwise. Logic wins over propaganda every time.
The counterpoint to the analogy has already been discussed.

And the analogy still works, so as far as the argument goes, that "counterpoint" accomplished nothing.
You’ve said this a few times.  I’ve argued that’s not true.


You've attempted to argue it isn't true, but your argument comes down to "because I say so". Your say so runs counter to logical reasoning - you're entitled to believe that if you want to, but don't try to argue as though your opinion holds the same weight as logical reasoning.
You don’t have better defense skills.


That's right, you have much better debate skills, since you are sitting there still trying to defend a debunked position with an argument that amounts to "because I say so". That's the most skilled strategy I've ever seen. *rolls eyes*
False.  People are making fun of you because it’s fun and they don’t feel like arguing anymore.


Some of you trying to make fun of me is akin to a bunch of special needs children "making fun" of their adult instructor. "Ha ha, you're so much smarter than us but we're making fun of YOU..."

Just like such an instructor would, I feel bad that I'm chuckling at your efforts, because it's really all you've got left. So have at it - if it makes you feel better to try to "make fun" of me, go right ahead. Just don't hurt yourself on the playground before you have to ride the special bus home to your mommies.
You say it, so it must be true.  Right?

No. It's a classic pattern for the frustrated holder of a near and dear debunked position during debate on internet message boards. It's always amusing that no matter how smart or unique people think they are, when they are beaten in debate they always retreat to the same predictable pattern all the losers follow.
Christ, burnsy, he's trolling you hard. Everyone knows he's a retarded troll that has never won an argument here. Even bis knows it. He's just baiting you into giving him attention.
BL I've destroyed every argument you've ever tried to make against me. You know better than to even try now. I own you in any argument at any time.

At least burnsy is a gamer and TRIES - you don't even do that. You're recessed into ryrun territory - you've been owned so many times you run and hide at the mere mention of a possible debate with me.



5/13/2013 2:08 PM
Holy ****, biz, I don't care anymore.  I was simply trying to make a point on how that's a ridiculous way to have a debate.  Obviously that went over your head, or you disagree with me.
5/13/2013 2:14 PM
While he's obviously trolling, it's also a game of attrition for him.    If he can bore you into not responding by being excessively wordy, in his mind, he "wins".   If he keeps repeating himself until you tire of responding, he "wins" again.   If you block him in order to ensure you don't get caught up in his dumbassery, he "wins" yet again.   
5/13/2013 2:26 PM
5/13/2013 2:40 PM
Holy ****, biz, I don't care anymore.  I was simply trying to make a point on how that's a ridiculous way to have a debate.  Obviously that went over your head, or you disagree with me.

Yes, it's ridiculous because it doesn't make it easy for your to argue with me. Again, I wasn't aware making it easy on  you was among my jobs when I'm trying to defend my point of view.
While he's obviously trolling, it's also a game of attrition for him. 
Anyone who wants to say I'm trolling, please explain exactly how you think I'm doing so, as I don't do any of the things trolls commonly do. Otherwise, please stop saying I'm trolling.
If he can bore you into not responding by being excessively wordy, in his mind, he "wins".   If he keeps repeating himself until you tire of responding, he "wins" again.   If you block him in order to ensure you don't get caught up in his dumbassery, he "wins" yet again.  
I don't need to do anything to win. I already debunked every legit argument the opposing side has presented, so unless they've got something new, I've already won. There's no point to attempt to win when the game is over and you've already done it.

Now I'm just making sure the idiocy that has followed from several people doesn't go unchecked by me. I'll do that until it stops or I become bored, whichever comes first.


5/13/2013 2:43 PM
Troll
5/13/2013 2:48 PM
Yes, so as I said, you feel being wordy helps your argument.  By helping it, I mean making it physically difficult to argue with you.
5/13/2013 3:22 PM
  By helping it, I mean making it physically difficult to argue with you.

The arguments themselves are what is making it difficult for people to argue with me, and part of that is because I respond precisely to what others are saying.

There is no physical difficulty involved. That's an excuse because people couldn't argue effectively regardless of what style I used in formulating my argument.

In short: You're grasping at straws and looking for any excuse as to why you can't effectively argue, when the problem is really that your argument has been debunked, not with these other things.
5/13/2013 3:32 PM (edited)
You can respond precisely to what others are saying by using 1/11 of the words, as I did earlier.  Also, as I said earlier, I'm not arguing this topic with you anymore.  Just making the point that you're insanely verbose.  

EDIT: And I'd argue that you're doing it as a strategy to "win" an argument.  You've posted several things in conversation with me to which my response was essentially "Yea, you told me all that before, but that doesn't show any evidence/answer my question to you."  You're essentially a politician in a debate.  Answer a question, but not actually say anything while you're doing it.
of 358

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.