Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Fenris-77" data-source="post: 8255254" data-attributes="member: 6993955">Perhaps we should use the actual definition of equivocation if it's going to play such a large role in the thread? Just a thought. Your description actually matches my definition pretty well, as it captures the active obfuscation.&nbsp; Are you claiming that anyone in this thread has actively obscured the meaning of, for example, fiction, in our discussion? Someone needs to be actively obscuring meaning or you're using the wrong word, something that several posters have suggested to you multiple times. So which is it? Are we (or is someone else) actively attempting to conceal or mislead, or are you mistaken about the meaning of the word? You need to pick one.Edit: Your examples mean the same as mine (especially the fancy top one that uses the kill shot word LOGIC, so there's no out there.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Fenris-77, post: 8255254, member: 6993955"] Perhaps we should use the [I]actual[/I] definition of equivocation if it's going to play such a large role in the thread? Just a thought. Your description actually matches my definition pretty well, as it captures the active obfuscation. Are you claiming that anyone in this thread has [B]actively[/B] obscured the meaning of, for example, fiction, in our discussion? Someone needs to be actively obscuring meaning or you're using the wrong word, something that several posters have suggested to you multiple times. So which is it? Are we (or is someone else)[B] actively[/B] attempting to conceal or mislead, or are you[B] mistaken [/B]about the meaning of the word? You need to pick one. Edit: Your examples mean the same as mine (especially the fancy top one that uses the kill shot word [I]LOGIC[/I], so there's no out there. [/QUOTE]

Verification