|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Aug 1, 2009 1:24:32 GMT -5
Dantesvirgil, you are a complete & total hypocrite. I can't be the only person in that thread to have seen the way you completely ignored it every time I pointed out an example of your hypocrisy. Then you resort to those bullshit cheeky comments. I believe my favorite one was, "You're absolutely right, & perfectly justified!" LOL! Yeah, because I hadn't admitted, just a few posts prior, to being wrong in several basic points of my argument! Your problem is not that I refuse to admit that I'm wrong, it's that you refuse to. You say I have a "habit of getting into prolonged semantics arguments." I know what you're referring to. And for the record, you act just like Redhunter. He would claim I was angry, then cry about it when I accused him of the same thing, too. But hey, why stop at that comparison! Why not use this as yet another chance to point out your hypocrisy? But I'm supposed to believe like 5 posts later that you're "perfectly calm"? Yeah, right. So, which is it? Oh, and let's not forget this gem: That is not what you said. You said I did not look up the words. There was no "first." And this is right after you pulled Redhunter's famous, "You just say you used a bad wording choice!" line out of your ass. So, let me get this straight: If I say my wording was bad, I'm obviously lying & trying to weasel out of things, but if you claim to have meant something other than what you literally said, I should just bow my head in submission & not call you on it? You know, I don't even know why I'm typing up this rant. Maybe I'm hoping someone else from that topic will point out your double-standard, because I know that if you read this, you'll just go: Yep. I'm a total hypocrite, & you're never wrong! Dumbass. Completely ignoring these things does not change the fact that you did them. And as an aside, what the fuck? You're a moderator, I seriously expected you to give me a warning for spamming, then tell me to take it to Flame & Burn. We were way off topic there.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Aug 1, 2009 1:38:01 GMT -5
You couldn't even finish this post without resorting to strawman arguments. I know this is probably "snarky" or whatever, but it really does put things in perspective.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Aug 1, 2009 1:49:40 GMT -5
If you would quote the straw man argument in question, I would happily respond to that.
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on Aug 1, 2009 4:38:13 GMT -5
You know, this whole thing parallels that huge and honestly tiresome debate that I had with you Lithp. Honestly, just give it a rest. I've had to skim over most of what was posted between you two, because it felt I was reading over that fail thread we had. Same shit, just different topic.
Overall, meh. Also, please don't do the whole "I expect better from the mods" shit. We are also human by the way, not machines, and thus are entitled to our own thoughts and opinions. Whilst we all deal with moderator issues as professionally as we can, when it comes to normal, day-to-day discussions on the forums, we aren't obliged to always take the middle ground. And if being sarcastic and/or annoyed with someone is not 'befitting' for a mod, well then, so sorry to disappoint.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Aug 1, 2009 7:14:24 GMT -5
Starting out with "I can't be the only one to notice" reads like "Help me make my point because I can't do it myself!" Yeah, I took my eye off the ball for a minute toward the end, and that's why I decided to go with "I'm sure you're right" and frankly just let you rage into the wind. You took a hard right turn into ad homing (which means "to the man", by the way, in case you don't know the definition of that one either), and I nearly followed suit. It's one thing to attack the argument. Actually it's the right thing. But having to resort to the equivalent of "I know you are but what am I" or "what's your excuse -- Oooooh, snap!" is just childish. I have no intention of going back to high school with you, hon. Here's the thing. You need to learn how to argue better. Everyone one does. That includes me, that includes you. For example, if you can't see the strawman Amaranth was referring to, that might be a clue. You shouldn't have to get it quoted for you. You shouldn't have to have definitions spelled out for you -- or if you do, you should at least be able to say: "Huh. I didn't know that." Or at the least "interesting!" or something. You also have a thing for latching onto what you think something means and then holding on in a my-mother-drunk-or-sober kind of way. While those two main things persist, you're going to get people asking you wtf you're talking about. I wasn't the only one, by the way, asking you wtf you were talking about. As to your modding comments, that really cracks me up. Twice I asked a hostile poster to back the fuck off -- once because you were in the line of fire in, of all things, an ad hom. But you're upset because you didn't get a warning for spam?! Alrighty then. As a mod, my job is to try to keep the rules Distind has in place. That's about it. It doesn't mean I don't get a personality. It doesn't mean I can't post in threads. And it sure as fuck doesn't mean I have to agree with you. So have it. I've said my piece. I've made my original argument. Spit into the wind if you think it's necessary.
|
|
|
Post by Sandafluffoid on Aug 1, 2009 7:21:09 GMT -5
Starting out with "I can't be the only one to notice" reads like "Help me make my point because I can't do it myself!" Yeah, I took my eye off the ball for a minute toward the end, and that's why I decided to go with "I'm sure you're right" and frankly just let you rage into the wind. You took a hard right turn into ad homing (which means "to the man", by the way, in case you don't know the definition of that one either), and I nearly followed suit. It's one thing to attack the argument. Actually it's the right thing. But having to resort to the equivalent of "I know you are but what am I" or "what's your excuse -- Oooooh, snap!" is just childish. I have no intention of going back to high school with you, hon. Correct me if I am wrong, but is that last sentence not in itself a rather superfluous ad hominem comment? In a comment about ad hominem fallacies that's deliciously ironic, unless of course that was intentional.
|
|
|
Post by Aqualung on Aug 1, 2009 8:56:26 GMT -5
DV, lord of the hypocrites. By the way, I just love how you cried and bitched about how I "derailed" the bitch about the mods thread, and said you weren't going to say anymore about it, but then you go and make a whole other post about it (the last one in the thread), which wasn't even a response to anyone in particular. Just had to have the last word, eh? I was going to take the high road and not call you out on it, but since Lithp here started this thread, what the fuck. I don't care. You need to learn that just because YOU disagree with someone doesn't mean they're wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on Aug 1, 2009 9:17:06 GMT -5
DV, lord of the hypocrites. By the way, I just love how you cried and bitched about how I "derailed" the bitch about the mods thread, and said you weren't going to say anymore about it, but then you go and make a whole other post about it (the last one in the thread), which wasn't even a response to anyone in particular. Just had to have the last word, eh? I was going to take the high road and not call you out on it, but since Lithp here started this thread, what the fuck. I don't care. You need to learn that just because YOU disagree with someone doesn't mean they're wrong. Umm, if we disagree on something, we both think we are right on something until one comes to a conclusion at the end of a discussion. If we didn't think at one point that we were right, then we wouldn't have grounds to disagree on something. The only way to find out whether we are right or wrong is through discussion. So on that bit, it is a bit moot. Also, what was wrong about that last post by DV on the mods thread? I thought it was just a fine post on its own. Again, so what if it happened to be the last post on the matter? Why should it matter if it was the last post? Did YOU want to have the last say on the matter? Again, bit of a petty issue to pick on. Anyways, I'll leave DV to defend herself (as she's more than capable), but I'm just pointing out what I think are a bit silly reasons to be picking a fight on.
|
|
|
Post by Aqualung on Aug 1, 2009 9:19:54 GMT -5
No, my point was after she pissed and moaned about the thread being derailed and didn't want to talk about it anymore she continued with it anyway. Is that so hard to understand? Oh, I forgot who i was talking to. It probably is.
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on Aug 1, 2009 9:25:12 GMT -5
No, my point was after she pissed and moaned about the thread being derailed and didn't want to talk about it anymore she continued with it anyway. Is that so hard to understand? Oh, I forgot who i was talking to. It probably is. *raises an eyebrow* Okay, but with the way that thread in general went along towards that final post, a number of other posters were doing perspective posts which in summary ended the discussion. And in that light, it wouldn't be surprising if DV felt at least like contributing to that. The fact the discussion ended anyway at that point is hardly something to be moaning about. So please, don't insult my intelligence.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Aug 1, 2009 9:50:14 GMT -5
Starting out with "I can't be the only one to notice" reads like "Help me make my point because I can't do it myself!" Yeah, I took my eye off the ball for a minute toward the end, and that's why I decided to go with "I'm sure you're right" and frankly just let you rage into the wind. You took a hard right turn into ad homing (which means "to the man", by the way, in case you don't know the definition of that one either), and I nearly followed suit. It's one thing to attack the argument. Actually it's the right thing. But having to resort to the equivalent of "I know you are but what am I" or "what's your excuse -- Oooooh, snap!" is just childish. I have no intention of going back to high school with you, hon. Correct me if I am wrong, but is that last sentence not in itself a rather superfluous ad hominem comment? In a comment about ad hominem fallacies that's deliciously ironic, unless of course that was intentional. I doubt it. Frankly, Dantesvirgil is right about one thing: I do need help making my point. But it's not my fault. Every time I point out the woman's double-standard, she completely ignores it. And--as I believe you've just seen--they aren't all that difficult to point out. For Dante: Oh, the ad hominem thing is bullshit, quite frankly. Maybe the time I said you were making an ass out of yourself counts, but the hypocrisy claim does not, as it's pretty well been demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt to anyone who wasn't ignoring it (you). Frankly, it's a laugh hearing you tell me to admit I was wrong. Need I remind you & your overly selective memory that I DID? You, however, do not. I note that you made it a point to ignore the quoted examples YET AGAIN. As for this straw man, there's every possibility it doesn't fucking exist. But of course, the fact that it hasn't been pointed out can't mean it isn't there, it simply must mean that I'm just too stupid to notice it! And for Bluefinger: First of all, I didn't say "I expect better from the mods." I made a half-assed observation, then let people go where they wanted it to. Secondly, I have to question how far you read, because it got pretty damn ridiculous towards the end, & even while the main argument was still going on, I pointed something out to Dantesvirgil a few times that she seemed to make it a point to ignore: Dante: How is this different from a KKK rally? Me: It's the difference between a general exclamation & a directed statement. How is this different from harassment? Dante: It's not my job to make your argument for you! Paraphrased. But I do believe you see my point. That, right there? Double-standard. Lastly, "give it a rest" my ass. Dante gave me a giant speech with a bunch of shit about how I was moving the goal posts & being dishonest & other such oxenschite, then had the audacity to claim she was "walking away from the argument." Since she advertised a very impartial, mature way of handling things, I find it strange that you're offended when I hold her to that. I think it makes perfect sense to call her on that nonsense, so that's exactly what I'm going to do, & if you feel offended as a fellow moderator, or whatever, so be it. Edit: Shit, I almost forgot to do this: I said earlier that I "looked at the definition later." Well, that's not exactly accurate. In fact, Death PMed me the link. I didn't really see any reason to look, since the argument was, for all intents & purposes, over. The thing about me still looking at harassment, however, is accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on Aug 1, 2009 10:01:50 GMT -5
Okay, Lithp. But here's one more note to the whole thing:
You were trying to imply that her reaction was somehow less of that from what you'd expect as a moderator, to which I rebutted with what I had said before. We are still human beings at the end of the day. Honestly, DV was at least correct in pointing out issues with your argumentation, to which you have acknowledged at least, so really, at this point, if you are trying to call her out on something, the only real reason I can see is her getting frustrated? And if that's the case, how's this no different between when me and you had that discussion a while ago? Is it less of her to show some emotion after a discussion that has gone badly?
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Aug 1, 2009 10:16:05 GMT -5
Blue, let's be honest, you kicked my ass in that debate. Dante did no such thing. She got impatient & started flinging out shit. I wasn't proven wrong until Death sent me the damn link.
And I just found out that she had intended to help me. >.>
Irony: It is ironic.
Point being, Dante didn't get frustrated with a discussion that was going badly, she got frustrated with a discussion that was going fairly well, at the time.
Also, if it's not wrong to show some emotion when frustrated at an incredibly stupid discussion, then why did you tell me to "give it a rest"?
<.<
>.>
Just sayin'.
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on Aug 1, 2009 10:20:39 GMT -5
Blue, let's be honest, you kicked my ass in that debate. Dante did no such thing. She got impatient & started flinging out shit. I wasn't proven wrong until Death sent me the damn link. And I just found out that she had intended to help me. >.> Irony: It is ironic. Point being, Dante didn't get frustrated with a discussion that was going badly, she got frustrated with a discussion that was going fairly well, at the time. Also, if it's not wrong to show some emotion when frustrated at an incredibly stupid discussion, then why did you tell me to "give it a rest"? <.< >.> Just sayin'. Well, fair enough, it just seemed to me like both of you were getting out of hand, so yeah. I'll take back "give it a rest" at this point anyway, though I intended to at least just get things to calm down a little. But meh... I'll let you two work it out.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Aug 1, 2009 10:31:34 GMT -5
I AM CALM! >_<
But seriously, I'm not really that angry right now. Not as compared to the Redhunter Fiasco Part II.
Also, I didn't mean to tell you to "STFU," but eh, whatever you think is best.
|
|