LogFAQs > #932268416

Jakyl25 posted...

Thats...exactly what we are arguing. Im not sure how you missed that and think we are arguing something else.

not exactly. there are some subtle but important differences, which I have already outlined in my post above.

the word 'or' in my post is very important.

by engaging in the debate with "mike," you have perpetuated the debate. (for the more pedantic, I know you're crawling all over board 8, yes, I know they are not LITERALLY arguing with mike matei!)

mike's opinion is his argument.
your argument is that MIKE'S opinion is wrong.

my argument is that neither of your opinions matter -- even if I disagree with mike and you also disagree with mike. I never joined that discussion, because I also think ME disagreeing with mike does not matter. this is why I have only brought it up when it was specifically relevant.

like you claim that your argument is the same as mine, that a person does not need permission from the internet for their beliefs... and yet we have a whole topic about how mike's opinion is wrong. you -are- challenging his permission to hold those beliefs!

but, more importantly, to reiterate what I've already said above... having this discussion with "mike" at all means that you believe that it's a valid discussion. I believe it is NOT a valid discussion. that is the difference between us.

also keep in mind my initial post was not directed specifically at you. so using your own conduct as a defense for my earlier criticisms is a bit unfair. and tying your own behavior to StealThisSheen and others by saying "we" is also a very unfair and difficult way of arguing. it encourages me to give examples of things that they have done, to which you can always respond by saying "well I haven't done that." though you implicitly took on the burden of their behavior when you said "we."


---

now I only see your dull imposter
https://imgur.com/BYYr6fn