waaaah

[Beerfish]

"Anecdotal evidence is used by people who have so hopelessly lost the argument that they resort to backing up what's left of it via personal anecdotes. Ergo, anecdotal evidence. "

 

People who like to talk all fancy like an lecture us poor louts with many flowery posts are usually wrong. Your 'u luz' was the best part of your multi post argument.

[Cantousent]

I thought Junkyard Dog was just goofing around. It seemed obvious the first poster isn't a 12 year old and folks joke around on these boards all of the time.

 

To go out of your way to attack someone for joking around on the internet has to take a lot of time.

 

Also, it's asinine.

 

The originator of this thread already claimed he would seek professional help if the situation did not improve and he had a couple of reasonable ideas for actions he could take in the meantime. Furthermore, he, himself, said that he had not posted in order to receive professional advice. He only posted to do what most folks do on these kinds of boards, chat about something and strike up a conversation.

 

I mean, Role-player posts a thread and is attacked. Junkyard Dog posts in a thread and he's attacked. Is there a trend? I'm new here, but it certainly seems like it.

[Ronald]

To go out of your way to attack someone for joking around on the internet has to take a lot of time.

Aside from this being highly subjective, as well as a baseless assumption, your point is? In all honesty, nobody who posts on an interweb message board is in the correct position to judge how others utilize their time, myself included.

 

Also, it's asinine.

 

This tidbit doesn't mesh well with the rest of your post, which is very well-thought out and intell... no, wait, the rest of your post is equally stupid, in my humble opinion.

 

The originator of this thread already claimed he would seek professional help if the situation did not improve and he had a couple of reasonable ideas for actions he could take in the meantime.

[Cantousent]

Ah, what a surprise. Here I thought you'd have to jump up and flex your intellectual muscle. My mistake. Keep beating on your chest, tarzan.

[Ronald]

Ah, what a surprise.

[Cantousent]

Your attacks were to the argument but mine have been to the man?

 

Perhaps, in my culture, calling you Tarzan is a great compliment. Perhaps bringing up your intellectual muscle is a way of exalting it. I don't know, but I revel in your tutelage. Please continue. I'm all ears.

 

I'm also sure you must be great fun at parties. No, don't be offended. Learn how to take a compliment.

[Ronald]

Your attacks were to the argument but mine have been to the man?

Now, which one is ad hominem, and which one is arguing?

 

Perhaps, in my culture, calling you Tarzan is a great compliment.  Perhaps bringing up your intellectual muscle is a way of exalting it.

 

Pardon me. From now on, before addressing another person on the internet in any way, I will make sure to discern their ethnicity and nationality. Your culture is irrelevant when, in the context in which your comment was written, the inescapable conclusion is that it was an insult. To my culture, at least, if you want to play this game.

[Cantousent]

So, we're playing a game?

 

I would think, without an agreed framework from which to argue, that there can be no attack that is not against the individual. Right? I mean, you're drawing conclusions from context. That makes sense. ...But you also say that you seek to argue against my argument but not my person. The context of your statements led me to believe that you were attacking me personally.

 

On the other hand, for all you know, I might find your attacks clever.

 

Furthermore, you might not be attacking either me or my arguments. Perhaps it's all a misunderstanding. Who knows?

 

Now, if I were to make an ad hominem attack against you, such as calling you a jackass, then I guess there wouldn't be anything left to say. That's clearly a personal attack.

 

For the record, I do think, in context, your attacks don't seem to have an overarching goal. They seem to be attacks ad homines. After all, you point out the fallacies of Junkyard Dog as he responded to hungry. You then, in your response to me, attack hungry also. You are indiscriminant and capricious.

 

You say that these attacks are not personal in nature. From my perspective, all of your attacks are personal. Sure, you observe some form, but insulting another fellow with a ten syllable word is just as much an attack as insulting him with a four letter word.

 

The fact is, we're not arguing to convince each other anyhow. I think you're a bore, an admitted ad hominem attack, and you can believe of me what you'd like. I will simply let folks read what we have to say and they'll agree with whichever one of us they choose. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to find that most folks think both of us are bores. In your case, they'd be right. There I am attacking you ad hominem.

 

*shrug*

[Gorth]

For those of us who only have English as a third language and Latin way down the list... What's an "Ad Hominem" ? Might be useful if I want to insult somebody at a future date

[Cantousent]

ad hominem attacks are "to the man." ...Or to a man or person, I guess. Latin lacks a definite article.

[Junkyard Wolf]

Im glad you asked Gorth,I didnt want to give him more ammunition

I can see by the lack of some peoples sense of humor that joining these forums was a waste of my time,it seems that a small portion of the posters seem to think they own the place and have the right to get way outta hand.

[Junkyard Wolf]

oh ya,hey Mr Moderator,kill my account please.

[Guaigean]

Wow, what a huge argument to occur in a two hour time frame... And I thought I checked the board a lot.

[Fionavar]

I believe this would constitute derailment. Junkyard please PM me if you are serious about your account - though I hope you are not. For the sake of na