Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mal Malenkirk" data-source="post: 72133" data-attributes="member: 834">Myth:  Xeovk made 8 arguments, clearly labelled as such and concluded with a quip.  It was clearly an exaggeration and perhaps not the best way to conclude an argumentation. Still this was the part of his post you decided to quote and treat exactly as if it was an argument, which it was not.  It was a colourful way to express the conclusion (The conclusion being that ogre are not ECL 5, not that the Tarrasque is ECL 20). “Therefore I don’t think Ogre are ECL 5” would have been a more formal way to conclude.  But it still meant the same thing.  If you don’t agree, you should “attack” the arguments that lead to the conclusion you consider to be wrong. If I argument in this fashion;1-Argument A2-Argument BIf you think that their administration handled this crisis properly, I guess I should offer them the services of my pet monkey.  He’d raise their efficiency to new levels.This just mean that I think that the administration did a very poor job during the latest crisis and arguments A&B explains why.  Hopefully nobody will quote my conclusion and start to explain to me why it’s biologically impossible for a monkey to perform well in an administrative position.  This sort of thing happen frequently on this, or on any board, and it annoys me.It’s true that I only singled you out because Xeovk is my friend.  That doesn’t change the fact that you quoted his conclusion, treated it as an argument and dragged it in a direction that had nothing to do with the issue at hand.</blockquote>

Verification