A big question popped into my head when reading EbonyWood's replies. "Is this person even addressing me? EW quoted my posts, but who is EW arguing against? It definitely isn't against what he just quoted!"
EbonyWood's tactics is consistent with that of someone that stresses easily. These are the people that have a conniption attack when they see direct disagreement. This stress factor turns into anger when a counter argument destroys their argument.
They set stress shields up to protect their egos. This includes building strawmen and shooting them. You'll see this as I progress through EbonyWood's response.
EbonyWood: Do you ever get anything right?
If I'm posting, I'm getting it right. Your arrogance may not make this obvious to you. On this thread, I'm right. My reasoned argument makes me right. Facts, first hand experience, and extensive research supports my reasoned arguments.
Those opposing me don't have an argument. Logic, research or experience is absent from their arguments in this thread. They simply don't have them. So the opposing side of the argument is wrong, it's that simple.
If I'm arguing on a thread, it's because I know more about a topic than those that I'm debating against.
EbonyWood: The comprehension issue is yours.
WRONG. Not only do I understand what the opposition says, I've got them profiled. I've debated with people like them over the past several years (with a break for my Iraq deployment). I understand what I'm reading.
The problem is on your end, you're demonstrating reading comprehension problems. More on that later.
EbonyWood: I said your awareness of other threads demonstrates that your claim that you only respond in this thread then leave, proves that you are lying.
Watch me demonstrate what I mean by your having a reading comprehension problem. What you said that caused me to say the above:
"At this point, you log into one of your other IDs and go and help out your boys." -- EbonyWood
What I actually said in response:
"I come on here once a day to reply to the drivel that people post in response to me. Then I leave and go somewhere else. I don't jump back in as another username to deal with you people's drivel on the other threads." -- herfacechair
Whether I'm aware of the other threads or not is beside the point.
You accused me of using other names on this board, and of "helping my boys out." Since you failed to understand what I was saying, let me simplify this for you. I post my batches on here, then I go elsewhere. That somewhere else is outside this message board.
I made an exception.
I labeled you a liberal. You challenged me to prove it. I responded to that by going on your collarme profile, and clicking on the button leading to your posts. Sure enough, you said things that incriminated you as a liberal.
Since what you said on my thread was wrong, I had to fact check your claims. When I checked, the opposition was prevailing over your side of the argument... they weren't "coughing up blood," as you claimed.
What does this all boil down to? I checked the other threads so that I could prove you wrong. I succeeded, like everything you said, your statements about what was happening on the other thread was wrong.
What you said is deception at best, a lie at worst.
You implied that I'm participating on the other threads... You implied that I'm also reading those other threads in addition to the thread I debated on... You implied that I'm doing this consistently...
I only focused on this thread until you accused me of participating on other threads... using another username. When I took action to prove you wrong... with your own words... you abandoned your original position. Instead, you accused me of lying.
You're not just satisfied with lying... you're also being shady.
You deliberately quoted me out of context... deleting a statement you knew would make your argument wrong. It forced what you did quote to communicate something that I wasn't communicating.
I added my statement back in, and highlighted it in red, so that what you quoted communicated what I intended to communicate.
Intellectually, you knew that you lost the fight. But, to sate your ego, you pulled the above strawman maneuver. You argued against something that I wasn't communicating. You followed that up with a conclusion based on your misinterpretation of what I said.
If anybody has piss poor reading comprehension, it's you.
Ebony Wood: It's a simple and irrefutable concept son, try and keep up.
I proved your argument wrong with facts, reason and logic. Hence, your argument isn't a simple and irrefutable concept. It's that simple.
Your argument is a strawman argument. Now THAT's an irrefutable concept.
My argument still stands. I only participated on the thread that we debated on.
EbonyWood: And no, you're not pardoned for your incorrect assumptions.
I'd have to make an incorrect assumption before you claim that I made one. You can't entertain whether to pardon something, or not, if the cause for the pardon doesn't exist.
My assessments are dead accurate. My argument is dead accurate when I'm proving you wrong. They're also dead accurate when I'm proving the opposition wrong.
Dismissing my fact based assessment as an "incorrect assumption," is the easier option for you. It allows you to hold onto your own biases, opinions and prejudices... without having to deal with a series of acts that'll disrupt all of that... and destroy your ego in the process.
You're making assumptions in addition to advancing red herring arguments.
EbonyWood: If you want to argue against a proposition that isn't even mine (which you also did in the previous post and I couldn't even be bothered to waste time on), go ahead, but basically you're proving that you lack the ability to attribute correctly.
WRONG. I'm arguing against an assumption you made. My replies are the perfect medicine to your posts. They're also a perfect fit to what you said.
Again, look at the reconstructed exchange that we had. You assumed that I had other usernames. You assumed that I also participated on those other threads.
I turned around and addressed you point by point. My replies were dead accurate, and very applicable to what you just said.
Your comment is equivalent to saying, "Relax, it was just a bad dream." Your ego wants it to be a bad dream so that you could fart an opinion to try to dismiss it.
You're advancing a strawman argument.
You've made things up. You're putting words in my mouth, and arguing against what you thought I said, or meant, rather than what I actually said.
You're no different than thompsonx and others that I've debated here. You people tend to use the same tactics. My refusing to stay with your strawman/red herring approaches is me sticking to to the argument. It's not me arguing against a proposition that "isn't" yours.
It also doesn't constitute my arguing against a proposition that I made.
Again, I'm right on target when I'm addressing your points.
Quit arguing against something that I didn't say. Resist the urge to accuse me of arguing against a proposition you "didn't" make. Deal with getting called out for pulling comments out of your ass... just so that you could have something to say.
EbonyWood: At this point all you're offering is a counter argument to an argument you've constructed yourself.
Again, review our exchange as I've reconstructed it. Those are our own words.
Do realize that I have a habit of saving my replies to these debates. I've got folders with saved comments from debates I've had over the years.
Going back and quoting our actual transaction is as simple as applying "control F." Spare me your deception.
This isn't an argument that I made up, but one that we're actually involved in.
EbonyWood: Enjoy that while I get on with life.
I enjoy replying to you guys. Whether you get on with life or not remains to be seen. If you prove yourself wrong here, I'll use the above statement against you.
EbonyWood: If you need something to do, because basically I just think you have a sociopathic need to vent,
I've repeatedly said that I'll provide a counter rebuttal to a rebuttal to my post. That's a given:
"I'm going to do what I set out to do here. I will continue to destroy the opposition's argument as long as they continue spewing their nonsense here." --herfacechair
Being a reply freak helps me accomplish that.
Don't mistake this as my having a "sociopath need to vent." If anybody is doing that, it's you. Your disregarding what's actually happening in our exchange, and your demeanor, show that you've got a sociopath need to vent.
I've yet to see you advance a reasoned argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment