Ah, that's a reasonable hypothesis, worthy @greenteakitten. Thanks.
By the way, I just searched all of my forum posts for the words you quoted: "bring on the downvotes without arguing with me because you can't" .
Did you really mean to use quotation marks, rather than attempt merely to paraphrase me?
I ask because I found none of my posts with that precise language, and it frankly doesn't sound exactly like anything I'd write.
It's the "because you can't" that doesn't strike me as something I'd say so abruptly. I hope always to acknowledge the possibility that somebody COULD construct an argument contradicting my views -- indeed, I've admitted (more than once) that I could be wrong. I can quote myself acknowledging that possibility in the forum.
Did you really mean to paraphrase, rather than quote? Or did i simply not us the "search" function effectively.
In either event, thank you for your continued efforts to promote and supply reasonable debate.
@Noflaps
>I expect I might see downvotes or scathing laugh emojis long before seeing any actual answer to my question about specificity.
You put this and similar on a lot of your posts, where you claimed that nobody could form an actual answer to your arguments. It makes sense when you are already getting a debate, but it doesn't when nobody is arguing with you yet and imho can come across as condescending since it's so unprompted. Or maybe that's just me.
And yeah, it's not a quote, it's a version of what you have said in the past condensed and I don't think it's really inaccurate, and I didn't mean to make it sound like one!
>I hope always to acknowledge the possibility that somebody COULD construct an argument contradicting my views -- indeed, I've admitted (more than once) that I could be wrong. I can quote myself acknowledging that possibility in the forum.
Never said you don't acknowledge your mistakes, and that's why I don't agree with the notion that you debate in bad faith because people who do so are allergic to admitting they can be wrong. That's something you aren't.
*but*
You do often deflect when given the evidence you ask for. And sometimes it comes across like you don't want to actually see the evidence since you switch topics instead of acknowledging it, something which I trust is probably me misunderstanding due to the nature of being online, but I hope you can see how it comes across.
Yes, it wasn't a quotation, as I suspected.
With all due respect, I could tell that when I read it. I recognize my own viewpoint and writing style, pretty well. Indeed, I typically recognize the individual writing styles of others -- a bit like a fingerprint -- and have used that to identify, accurately if surprisingly, people who have changed their internet handles in the past.
True, I also have mentioned down-voting from time to time in the past, while hoping for a more articulated and explanatory response, because discouraging emojis and vague claims of "fallacy" are what I seem to encounter most from some of my worthy forum adversaries.
This despite the fact that I am well trained in formal logic and never confuse a converse with a contrapositive. I know which is equivalent to the original implication used to fashion it -- and which is not. Indeed, I once wrote a brief biography of Bertrand Russell who, with Whitehead, put great store in logic. Russell was a good guy, by the way.
But don't take my word for the nature of much that I encounter -- merely quietly observe as time passes. Or just look back to see past posts and consider what you find.
Please notice that those who call me humorous little names are not actually making a logical, explanatory rejoinder by doing that (although I suppose they are in some way contributing to the forum experience in a way that entertains some). Yet may their winters still be peaceful and beautiful. Christmas and Hanukkah both inspire us to remember that we are all brothers and sisters on a fundamental level, even when we disagree, and I wish all Lichess members well.
In the meantime, Happy Thanksgiving, if you are in a nation where that is celebrated -- which isn't all of them, of course, although all have some reason to be thankful. We have Lichess, for example.
And Lichess and its forum are certainly good things -- as are so many things related in any way to France. Like the greatest sporting event on Earth -- the Tour de France itself.
noflaps still don't know you can use quotation marks for paraphrasing.
noflaps still don't understand that saying stuff doesn't make them true.
noflaps still hillariously claim they can think critically while proving the opposite.
noflaps still taking the side of fascists.
noflaps, still thinks that using lots of words to say simple things is a sign of smarts... poor thing.
the only thing happening to you on these forums, noflaps, even posts like "here before flappy ruints yet again a topic", is you reaping what you saw. I've seen several users starting nice with you and slowly but surely losing their patience.
You are a toxic poster, a hatefull person, your huge ego prevents you to accept the least criticism, up to the points where you somehow supports/minimize public death treats from the governement to political opposition.
if people shout at you, it's because you proved them that you don't listen when adressed nicely.
if people stopped giving arguments in response to your... talking points, it's because they've seen what you do with them.
So fck you, fck your rethoric, fck your polite smugness and broadly speaking your hate and disdain for anything that is even remotely different from you.
At least I have the decency to say it directly to your face. that's transparency. You could take it as an example, but I suspect if you were honest and transparent, not many of your posts would remain unmoderated for long.
if i get moderated myself, might as well drop another one :
fuck fascists pigs and their followers.
Especially fascist keyboard warriors that preach violence but have no personal experience of it.
@TurtleMat said in #35:
> polite smugness
Ah yes, that was the word I was looking for in #25.
@greenteakitten you seem to be confused as why you even take noflap's side. For you said in #6:
> he does not force his political views condescendingly
but then you admitted in #29 that his posts are mainly
> both subtle ragebait and condescension, even if likely unintentional
So maybe the real (if maybe unconscious) reason why you take his side is because, as you said in #29:
> maybe I'm just too heavily biased myself
At least you are mature and self-knowing enough to recognise your own biases, which is not the case of everyone.
Ahem, whether @Noflaps (or anybody else, for that matter) is deflecting or not, intentionally or not, it seems like this thread has diverged far from it ́s original subject:
https://lichess.org/forum/off-topic-discussion/trump-calls-for-executing-democrats-over-message-to-military?page=1)
And that being the case, it could as well be closed, in my opinion.
@CoffeeBeanKiller
@greenteakitten
@chesseater78 said in #38:
> it could as well be closed, in my opinion.
(Un)fortunately you're not a mod. Although you might qualify for mini-mod.
@CoffeeBeanKiller said in #39:
> > it could as well be closed, in my opinion.
>
> (Un)fortunately you're not a mod. Although you might qualify for mini-mod.
You can ́t read, do you:
"in my opinion"
?