Nice to see you finally engaging in something, I was worried you were going to just say: Source?
But on a more serious note, that is an interesting criticism Dynamo. I am both surprised and not surprised. I am surprised that you would characterize me as ignoring counter arguments and being snarky when your modus operandi consists of avoiding any position which could possibly face criticism while simultaneously launching snarky memes and ad hominems from the sidelines.
I post many starterpack memes yes, but the idea that I'm somehow playing it safe is insane. I have lengthy debates when I
care about the topic. I even had one with you in this very thread about if Ben Shapiro is Alt-Right or not, and I remember you pulling the Kratesis dodge/tap out of "what's even the point of this". As if questioning why someone is debating politics in a political thread is a valid rebuttal.
If I'm posting memes from the sidelines its usually cause I don't care to get in a lengthy debate about if trump has a russian hand up his ass, because the topic doesn't interest me.
At the same time I am not surprised. Attacks on the character of this threads debaters is what you do and you will go to great lengths to find something to attack. Look how far back you went to find quotes to throw at Poohead. Not quotes which provided evidence to support your argument on some point of political contention but quotes to mock and belittle him for claims he had made about his romantic and personal life. I disagree with Poohead on many things but that left a bad taste in my mouth.
Now you want to toss a few ad hominems at me which I suspect is a way to avoid taking a concrete position on anything but still getting in a few jabs. I suspect you avoid taking a position because what if you were verbally beat up and embarrassed by a superior debater? It is easier to toss out a few attacks at the characters of the debaters in this thread because no one can provide evidence in defense of their character on the internet without "doxing" themselves. The character of other debaters is the perfect target! You get to belittle someone else and position yourself as their superior while avoiding any possibility of being proven wrong because your claims can't be falsified.
Its funny because apart from Sapiosexuality, I haven't actually disagreed with
@POOHEAD189 on one thing in this thread. So the idea that I use ad homenims to make up for a lack of argument begs the question: 'What argument in the first place?'
I'm not attacking the dude's romantic life, I'm attacking his humblebrag quotes about how girls run to him and he doesnt chase them. When its very obvious that while obviously a smart and or charming guy of course he chases girls he likes, just like damn near every non-celebrity straight male, including me in the world does.
The intent is playful, but if poohead seriously takes offense to it, which I doubt he does, then I will happily apologise.
But your point about attack character is a load of crap, every serious debate I've had has kept the focus strictly on the argument, and very respectful. Look at my exchange with
@The Harbinger of Ferocity about James Allsup and find my 'outrageous character attacks' or 'ad-homenims' go on, I'll wait. Or even better, ask the Cat-Man himself about how 'disrespectful' I was during the exchange.
If you said "your argument sucks because of X,Y and Z" then you would run the risk of being embarrassed when they provided evidence that proved your claims wrong. But when you say "you personally suck because of X, Y and Z" all they can do is say "that's not true."
But when the focus of your comments is not on the flaws of other's position or the strengths of your own position but instead on the flaws and foibles of other's character then you aren't really telling us anything about that person's flaws. We know everyone has personal flaws. When you went back I don't know how many pages to find quotes from Poohead to belittle him with you didn't tell me anything about Poohead but you told me a lot about you.
I probably shouldn't have quoted this because you've basically just repeated yourself and it just isnt true. You've decided to look at my one jab at Poohead and a handful of my snarky memes and try to come up with a half-assed conclusion about my debate style. I'll happily debate you on a subject without resorting to any sort of attacks, but I only engage when I feel like I have something to contribute to the topic that doesn't bore the crap out of me. How about we start with
why Ben Shapiro isn't Alt Right?
Zman
Scrawl Banditta
Ariamis
AP Ottovan
PrinceAlexus
