Sign in to follow this  
R34P3R

Your communities sensitivity towards a logical debate

Recommended Posts

Well as requested, I've decided to bring my topic of juggling into a completely new thread. Sounds unnecessary right? That's probably because it is.

As for your post, yes, you were clearly insulting Xelrog. Just because you're pointing out peoples' flaws (which, oftentimes, is a clear example of an insult) and sharing your own personal opinion doesn't mean that it's impossible to insult someone at the same time. It doesn't matter what you think you were doing, you did insult people along the way.

I'm trying to prove my point in a debate. While you can look at exploiting people's flaws as in insult, that's clearly not the way I decided to use it. Instead, I'm attempting to show people their flaws so that they will stop acting so immature, and learn that their not contributing to the thread. Thus giving them a clearly written out option, of thinking logically and contributing in the thread in a way that benefits the actual debate itself. So please, if anyone out there in this community can't withstand some constructive criticism on their own opinions, than don't post in threads about debates.

I clearly said in my last post that I wouldn't allow anymore of these non-juggle arguments in this thread, but you've pretty much taken my word for nothing. You could have just as easily sent me a private message or made a new thread about this, but instead you decided to just continue arguing about it here, which is exactly what I said not to do. If you're not going to listen to me, then fine, I'll just give you your warning.

You even saying this is annoying me. And no, that is not a blatent insult. That's me expressing my honest opinion on how morally blind you must be to have missed my entire post addressing this. If you would have read over my post, you would have known that I'm not taking out a personal vengeance on you. Instead of repeating myself, why don't you read over my post again, and anyone else who doesn't understand that can do so also.

This is a part of the debate that needs to be addressed. People's immaturity is getting the way of the actual debate, and I'm asking for this people to either helpfully contribute to the debate, or not contribute at all. Otherwise, this thread is just bound to run around into circles indefinitely. If you honestly believe that this community isn't capable of having a debate, than you can go ahead an lock this thread yourself.

One more thing, you have no right to tell people to stop posting in this thread, especially if your reason for saying so is simply because you don't like how they're debating.

Again, you aren't understanding me. Which again, is aggravating me. I'm not telling people to stop posting because I simply don't like the way they're debating. I'm telling people to stop posting because their not debating at all, and there just clogging up the thread with spam. Now personally towards you Shushi, isn't that your job to not allow?

You can say whatever you want, Kelly and the other Moderators will completely agree with me on this. What you said was definitely against the rules, and if you continue to ignore my warnings, you're going to end up getting yourself banned.

Kelly and the other Moderators would only agree with you on this because they feel a level of trust in you. You looking at me like some sort of criminal is just abusing your power of trust and bending it towards your own opinion of who you do and do not like.

If you, Kelly, or any other Moderator's going to ignore my logic and posts, and honestly believes that no one in your community has the mental stability to debate in a thread, than please feel free to ban me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well since you want to debate you should know how to. Basing your arguments on fallacies is not the way to go, and ad hominem comments are fallacies; which makes your argument void.

Just because someone is an idiot he is wrong (ad hominem example 1)- basically what you wrote, the idiocy of someone is not related to the veracity of his arguments, in other words, even if you think someone is an idiot that doesn't mean he is wrong and you're right, and it's not even relevant to the debate.

Pointing out someone's flaws to prove how much of an idiot he is will not make his statement invalid, it does make you enter in a fallacy and look like a jerk.

TL;DR: L2Debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather not touch this with a ten foot pole, but I'll reply to a few of these blurbs.

Your communities sensitivity towards a logical debate

I've already made it clear that protecting peoples' feelings isn't the only reason we enforce the flaming rule.

Well as requested, I've decided to bring my topic of juggling into a completely new thread. Sounds unnecessary right? That's probably because it is.

This thread has nothing to do with juggling. Read through your post again, there's not one mention of juggling in it.

So please, if anyone out there in this community can't withstand some constructive criticism on their own opinions, than don't post in threads about debates.

They have as much of a right to post as you do. You're the one who has to change, not them. They're not the ones breaking the rules. If you don't want to follow them, don't post in threads about debates.

And no, that is not a blatent insult. That's me expressing my honest opinion on how morally blind you must be to have missed my entire post addressing this.

Well, first of all, that second sentence is very obviously an insult. It doesn't matter whether or not you intended it as an insult, it's an insult by forum standards, and would easily be considered an insult by most people. I don't get why you're living with this idea that you can't have a good debate without "pointing out other peoples' flaws." Is that what it takes for you to make a good point? Because I don't believe that's true at all.

Again, you aren't understanding me. Which again, is aggravating me. I'm not telling people to stop posting because I simply don't like the way they're debating. I'm telling people to stop posting because their not debating at all, and there just clogging up the thread with spam. Now personally towards you Shushi, isn't that your job to not allow?

Well, up until now, you have been making it sound like you want people to stop posting simply because you don't like the way they're debating.

"either use some logic in your posts, or don't post."

"If you or anybody else can't see that, than leave."

"please if your not going to use any thought in your arguments whatsoever don't post."

Even if this were seen your way, you're supposed to report potential spammers, not call them out. You don't have the authority to enforce the rules, nor do you have the authority to decide whether or not something is spam. Just report it. Also, just because somebody "isn't debating" doesn't mean they're spamming. It's a thread about juggling. Unless their posts have nothing to do with juggling, it's not spam.

You looking at me like some sort of criminal is just abusing your power of trust and bending it towards your own opinion of who you do and do not like.

Bending it towards my own opinion of who I do and don't like? I don't even know who you are! Do you seriously think I'd be stupid enough to give you a warning and threaten to ban you just because I don't like your opinion? I don't care what your opinion is, I hardly care about juggling, I hardly care about Castle Crashers, heck, I don't even care if Kelly ultimately decides to disagree with me and lets you off the hook. I can honestly say it makes no difference to me.

Anyways, yup... :| Just a few blurbs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your personal lack of understanding towards the definition of irrelevant insults or flaming.

"I disagree with your opinion because..." is a logical debate.

"Your posts are idiotic and unhelpful, and the fact that you don't realize it pisses me off" is flaming. It holds no relevance to the discussion. It's not debating. It's trying to win out by hurting the other person as much as you possibly can; it's childish bickering, no ifs, ands, or buts. The fact that you've carried this as far as you have only indicates how terrified you are of having to admit your own wrongdoing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I can see what your standing for. In some aspects I understand why you believe your right on the subject, and some aspects you keep avoiding the subject. I guess that what I've been trying to do is prove to myself that the internet can be a mature enough place for people to change their opinions. As it appears I was wrong. I'm tired of repeating myself because it's obvious no one here is willing to change there minds on anything I have to offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one here is arguing ANYTHING about the original argument, R3AP3R. We're here because you're adamantly convinced that you are inherently right and that anyone who has an opposing opinion has no right to debate it with you.

You called people idiots, you trivialized the validity of their posts, and you brushed aside their arguments - no matter how well or poorly they were made - simply because they were contrary to your opinion. We're here because, when someone tried to express their opinions and open a logical debate with you, you decided in your very first post that their opinion was stupid and they had no right to express it. Not only that, but you've continued to do exactly the same thing since then - just now, you insulted this entire thread, the forum, and the entire internet for that matter for being closed-minded just because they didn't agree with your behavior.

So, what is your opinion, exactly? Do you believe that you didn't do anything I just mentioned? Or is two sides throwing arbitrary insults at one another your idea of a logical debate? Maybe I'm not even in the ball park, so enlighten us as to where exactly you stand on the above question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your personal lack of understanding towards the definition of irrelevant insults or flaming.

"I disagree with your opinion because..." is a logical debate.

"Your posts are idiotic and unhelpful, and the fact that you don't realize it pisses me off" is flaming. It holds no relevance to the discussion. It's not debating.

i have to agree with this sentiment, if the quotes are accurate.

people are allowed to debate all they want here. emotionally charged statements do not inherently create forward progress. although they are good for popcorn moments, having rules in place to keep this to a minimum seems to fit best practices.

people's feelings do not necessarily take priority in our rules, but rather guidelines encouraging civil conversation or debate for visitors to review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your posts suck and they arn't helping debate juggling. Everyones freaking out because they don't like it. Im not flaming its called juggling stop getting mad.

That's what im getting out of your posts R34P3R. Look I don't want you to get banned but you need to stop insaulting people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look, I can see what your standing for. In some aspects I understand why you believe your right on the subject, and some aspects you keep avoiding the subject. I guess that what I've been trying to do is prove to myself that the internet can be a mature enough place for people to change their opinions. As it appears I was wrong. I'm tired of repeating myself because it's obvious no one here is willing to change there minds on anything I have to offer.

The point of a debate isn't changing the other side opinions or thoughts

TL;DR: L2Debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... yes it is?

Nope, it's exchanging thoughts, opinions and ideas to discuss them, if someone changes their mind after listening to other people that's up to them but making everyone think like you isn't the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why are you exchanging opinions? In order to establish a point of understanding and, in situations of conflict, persuade another to your side, thus ending the conflict. It's the reason debate does now and has always existed.

Just because you're trying to change someone's mind doesn't make it rude or uncivil - that's just simply what all debates ultimately are. Sometimes it happens, usually it doesn't; my opinion has been changed by debating with others before, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
my opinion has been changed by debating with others before, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I said it wasn't the point, not that it shouldn't happen.

If you enter a debate just to change the opposition's thoughts you are doing it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree. I think that's the qualifying factor of what makes it a debate. Why, look at that, we're doing it right now.

The exchange of thoughts, opinions, and ideas is called "conversation."

We are debating about debate yes, but, if everyone enters on a debate with "I am right, and i know this guys are wrong, i will just talk to them till they change their opinion" the debate would never end, which is my point.

I still don't think the whole reason to debate is to change someone else's opinion, maybe debate means something else in english then, but to my knowledge it's about two parties discussing a topic with arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i know this guys are wrong

I never once mentioned anything like that.

That would still qualify as debate, but a respectable debater keeps an open mind to the opposite point of view and considers every argument that the opposing side makes before making their own. A debate is a confrontation of two opposing viewpoints - if debate were simply a matter of expression, it wouldn't last long enough to qualify as a debate. One side would express their opinion, the other theirs, and that would be the end of that - every debate would be two posts long. In order for a debate to ensue, each side must have a point they aim to prove to the other - this can be civil or it can be uncivil; it's not necessarily the latter.

In short, the idea in going into a debate is, "My goal is to come to an agreement with the other party or parties, and while I believe myself to be right, I am open to being proven wrong."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this