Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 7546358" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Since my response wasn't &quot;when it comes to my table&quot;, this is a strawman. I don't mean exact wording, either. That isn't even vaguely in the spirit of my statement. Since neither I, nor anyone else, said anything to the effect that the rules are bad, nor any of the other nonsense presented here, this is a strawman. And here, you have put up the straw man of a position that individual tables are what I've been refering to as straw man arguements, and then knocked that straw man down, pretending you've refuting my claim that straw men are being deployed in this thread. It's straw man inception! I never claimed that the arguments based on individual tables are straw man arguments, max. I claimed that the posts I quoted here set up straw men to knock down. By the way, directly altering an argument isn't a requirement of the straw man argument. Intentionally misunderstanding the point of an argument and arguing against that percieved point also qualifies, as does inventing an argument or position from whole cloth to pretend the other person is supporting, and then refuting that. Any time you &quot;refute&quot; an argument or position not made or held by the person you're responding to, you are deploying a straw man for yourself to knock down.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 7546358, member: 6704184"] Since my response wasn't "when it comes to my table", this is a strawman. I don't mean exact wording, either. That isn't even vaguely in the spirit of my statement. Since neither I, nor anyone else, said anything to the effect that the rules are bad, nor any of the other nonsense presented here, this is a strawman. And here, you have put up the straw man of a position that individual tables are what I've been refering to as straw man arguements, and then knocked that straw man down, pretending you've refuting my claim that straw men are being deployed in this thread. It's straw man inception! I never claimed that the arguments based on individual tables are straw man arguments, max. I claimed that the posts I quoted here set up straw men to knock down. By the way, directly altering an argument isn't a requirement of the straw man argument. Intentionally misunderstanding the point of an argument and arguing against that percieved point also qualifies, as does inventing an argument or position from whole cloth to pretend the other person is supporting, and then refuting that. Any time you "refute" an argument or position not made or held by the person you're responding to, you are deploying a straw man for yourself to knock down. [/QUOTE]

Verification