Total Posts:97|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Can Juggle do something about Wrichcirw?

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 9:58:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Wrichcirw has it out for me. He has been harassing me for 2 months now. Wrichcirw has insulted me multiple times, and he has been vote bombing my debates to spite me.

Can Juggle please do something about him?
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:02:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 9:58:35 PM, DanT wrote:
Wrichcirw has it out for me. He has been harassing me for 2 months now. Wrichcirw has insulted me multiple times, and he has been vote bombing my debates to spite me.

Can Juggle please do something about him?

Ask Airmax for a restraining order. Nobody is going to ban him.
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:04:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
He voted you up in our debate. But even if you don't agree with his RFDs, you have to show some actual bias. Him voting against you a few times isn't proof of any bias...what specifically did he do?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:08:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:04:47 PM, Wnope wrote:
If you have an issue, I suggest messaging Airmax about it. He's mediated these kind of conflicts multiple times.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:14:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:04:47 PM, Wnope wrote:
If you have an issue, I suggest messaging Airmax about it. He's mediated these kind of conflicts multiple times.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:17:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?

No f*ckwad, DanT goes after everybody who doesnt vote for him in a debate and hes been PMing me about my vote in the same debate too. I checked to see if he reported me in the votebomb thread for votebombing (which he did) and then shortly after I saw his thread about the same crap and left my mark.

Now if you are done Ike please go bring shame to liberalism somewhere else.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:22:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:17:45 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?

No f*ckwad, DanT goes after everybody who doesnt vote for him in a debate and hes been PMing me about my vote in the same debate too. I checked to see if he reported me in the votebomb thread for votebombing (which he did) and then shortly after I saw his thread about the same crap and left my mark.

Now if you are done Ike please go bring shame to liberalism somewhere else.

I only ever votes on one of Dan T's debates, and got b1thed out for voting against him even though I believe his opponent clearly won (dont even remember the debate anymore). I think he's the only person to ever complain about one of my RFDs like that. Anyways, I just refuse to vote on his debates now. Or if I ever do in the future, he can try to ban me or something for not agreeing with me. I don't care.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:24:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:17:45 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?

No f*ckwad, DanT goes after everybody who doesnt vote for him in a debate and hes been PMing me about my vote in the same debate too. I checked to see if he reported me in the votebomb thread for votebombing (which he did) and then shortly after I saw his thread about the same crap and left my mark.

Now if you are done Ike please go bring shame to liberalism somewhere else.

whatever you say, bench.

I'm not a liberal by the way, or anything else for that matter. I judge issues individually and to an extent arbitrarily - not that I don't think that everyone does that (there are no justifiable principles that can guide political opinions). I'm just more forward about my doing so. So please don't call me a liberal again.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:26:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:24:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:17:45 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?

No f*ckwad, DanT goes after everybody who doesnt vote for him in a debate and hes been PMing me about my vote in the same debate too. I checked to see if he reported me in the votebomb thread for votebombing (which he did) and then shortly after I saw his thread about the same crap and left my mark.

Now if you are done Ike please go bring shame to liberalism somewhere else.

whatever you say, bench.

I'm not a liberal by the way, or anything else for that matter. I judge issues individually and to an extent arbitrarily - not that I don't think that everyone does that (there are no justifiable principles that can guide political opinions). I'm just more forward about my doing so. So please don't call me a liberal again.

I'm pretty sure self-awareness doesn't excuse anything.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:29:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The funny thing is we are supposed to only vote based on what's in the debate rounds, not the comments section, and certainly not based on the extra arguments someone sends us in a PM.
Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

Voting Standards: https://goo.gl...

And please disable Smart-Quotes: https://goo.gl...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:29:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:26:35 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:24:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:17:45 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?

No f*ckwad, DanT goes after everybody who doesnt vote for him in a debate and hes been PMing me about my vote in the same debate too. I checked to see if he reported me in the votebomb thread for votebombing (which he did) and then shortly after I saw his thread about the same crap and left my mark.

Now if you are done Ike please go bring shame to liberalism somewhere else.

whatever you say, bench.

I'm not a liberal by the way, or anything else for that matter. I judge issues individually and to an extent arbitrarily - not that I don't think that everyone does that (there are no justifiable principles that can guide political opinions). I'm just more forward about my doing so. So please don't call me a liberal again.

I'm pretty sure self-awareness doesn't excuse anything.

Your error is in thinking an excuse was required to start with.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:30:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

If that was what I was concerned about, than I would have mentioned you too.

Wrichcirw has been harassing me for months.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:30:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
yeah i think it was this debate that my vote got called out on.

http://www.debate.org...

this was also in addition to him debating people in the comments section for 150+ posts
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:31:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I also have similar experiences with DanT when I voted against him in his debate with thett3. This seems to be a common theme, I guess. Maybe we should ban DanT.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:31:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:29:28 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:26:35 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:24:50 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:17:45 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?

No f*ckwad, DanT goes after everybody who doesnt vote for him in a debate and hes been PMing me about my vote in the same debate too. I checked to see if he reported me in the votebomb thread for votebombing (which he did) and then shortly after I saw his thread about the same crap and left my mark.

Now if you are done Ike please go bring shame to liberalism somewhere else.

whatever you say, bench.

I'm not a liberal by the way, or anything else for that matter. I judge issues individually and to an extent arbitrarily - not that I don't think that everyone does that (there are no justifiable principles that can guide political opinions). I'm just more forward about my doing so. So please don't call me a liberal again.

I'm pretty sure self-awareness doesn't excuse anything.

Your error is in thinking an excuse was required to start with.

No, it's pretty much fact. Just saying "I recognize my political opinions are in the end arbitrary with no justifiable base," doesn't take away that fact and make your opinions worth anything.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:31:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:24:50 PM, 000ike wrote:

whatever you say, bench.

I'm not a liberal by the way, or anything else for that matter.

Dont kid yourself kid, when people on here are asked who the douchiest liberal on the site is, youre always on everyone's shortlist. You actually used to sh*t on me for when I claimed to be liberal because in youre eyes I wasnt as liberal as you even though to this day we still agree on like 85% of issues......

I judge issues individually and to an extent arbitrarily - not that I don't think that everyone does that (there are no justifiable principles that can guide political opinions). I'm just more forward about my doing so. So please don't call me a liberal again.

Ike youre so f*cking liberal you make Michael Moore look like Hannity, youre only fooling yourself (which isnt that hard to do really)
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:36:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:17:45 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?

No f*ckwad, DanT goes after everybody who doesnt vote for him in a debate

That is not true.

As I pointed out in the other thread.

"Here is some actual statistics, although the sample size I am working with is extremely small.

I lost 13 debates (not a large enough sample size). Of those 13 debates I only reported vote bombs on 9 of them (69%), one of those times I reported someone who voted bombed in my favor.

Of those 9 vote bombs 5 (56%) were countered and 4(44%) were uncountered, which means at-least 56% of the time people agreed with me. You cannot draw any logical conclusions from the 44% figure, other than that 44% remained uncountered. Again the sample size is way too small."

and hes been PMing me about my vote in the same debate too. I checked to see if he reported me in the votebomb thread for votebombing (which he did) and then shortly after I saw his thread about the same crap and left my mark.

Now if you are done Ike please go bring shame to liberalism somewhere else.

Here is the message.

"Can you please fix your vote?

The resolution was "If there was no labor shortage, there would be no market for slaves"

Which is Y if and only if X.

Your RFD states that you gave OMG arguments based on the following quote;

"Say there was a labor shortage in the US today: Would there be a corresponding increase in the demand for slave labor? I think that would be highly unlikely"

That follows the format X than Y, which does not disprove the resolution.

I needed to prove Y if and only if X
OMG needed to prove Y without X

Proving X without Y does not prove Y without X or disprove Y if and only if X"
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:37:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:31:24 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:

No, it's pretty much fact. Just saying "I recognize my political opinions are in the end arbitrary with no justifiable base," doesn't take away that fact and make your opinions worth anything.

Well it follows from my argument that nobody's opinion is worth anything. But I assume you're operative from a subjective, persuasive context and consistency through principle is what makes opinions compelling to others - and through admitting (what is an objective fact) that my opinion on ethics and policy is arbitrary and logically unjustifiable I've made it completely unpersuasive. So I'll just leave with this - where my object is to persuade, I won't mention this. Where my object is to describe the veracity of propositions, I'm under no obligation to present "worthy" opinions.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:38:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:37:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:31:24 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:

No, it's pretty much fact. Just saying "I recognize my political opinions are in the end arbitrary with no justifiable base," doesn't take away that fact and make your opinions worth anything.

Well it follows from my argument that nobody's opinion is worth anything. But I assume you're operative from a subjective, persuasive context and consistency through principle is what makes opinions compelling to others - and through admitting (what is an objective fact) that my opinion on ethics and policy is arbitrary and logically unjustifiable I've made it completely unpersuasive. So I'll just leave with this - where my object is to persuade, I won't mention this. Where my object is to describe the veracity of propositions, I'm under no obligation to present "worthy" opinions.

operating*
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:40:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:36:28 PM, DanT wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:17:45 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:04:33 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

112 seconds flat to flock to a thread and obnoxiously dismiss whoever it was that made the thread and whatever it was he was complaining about.

Is this a record time for you or am I behind?

No f*ckwad, DanT goes after everybody who doesnt vote for him in a debate

That is not true.

As I pointed out in the other thread.

"Here is some actual statistics, although the sample size I am working with is extremely small.

I lost 13 debates (not a large enough sample size). Of those 13 debates I only reported vote bombs on 9 of them (69%), one of those times I reported someone who voted bombed in my favor.

Of those 9 vote bombs 5 (56%) were countered and 4(44%) were uncountered, which means at-least 56% of the time people agreed with me. You cannot draw any logical conclusions from the 44% figure, other than that 44% remained uncountered. Again the sample size is way too small."


and hes been PMing me about my vote in the same debate too. I checked to see if he reported me in the votebomb thread for votebombing (which he did) and then shortly after I saw his thread about the same crap and left my mark.

Now if you are done Ike please go bring shame to liberalism somewhere else.

Here is the message.

"Can you please fix your vote?

The resolution was "If there was no labor shortage, there would be no market for slaves"

Which is Y if and only if X.

Your RFD states that you gave OMG arguments based on the following quote;

"Say there was a labor shortage in the US today: Would there be a corresponding increase in the demand for slave labor? I think that would be highly unlikely"

That follows the format X than Y, which does not disprove the resolution.

I needed to prove Y if and only if X
OMG needed to prove Y without X

Proving X without Y does not prove Y without X or disprove Y if and only if X"

You can't dictate to a judge what a resolution means. That has to be argued IN THE DEBATE, and if you can't convince the judge to follow your framework, oh well: sucks to be you.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:40:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:29:07 PM, Ragnar wrote:
The funny thing is we are supposed to only vote based on what's in the debate rounds, not the comments section, and certainly not based on the extra arguments someone sends us in a PM.

Well, the idea behind arguing a vote is that perhaps the voter didn't see something evident in the debate.

I've been called out plenty, and when it's legitimate I change my vote. I welcome feedback on any of my votes and am not afraid to back it up whenever appropriate.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:41:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:37:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:31:24 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:

No, it's pretty much fact. Just saying "I recognize my political opinions are in the end arbitrary with no justifiable base," doesn't take away that fact and make your opinions worth anything.

Well it follows from my argument that nobody's opinion is worth anything. But I assume you're operative from a subjective, persuasive context and consistency through principle is what makes opinions compelling to others - and through admitting (what is an objective fact) that my opinion on ethics and policy is arbitrary and logically unjustifiable I've made it completely unpersuasive. So I'll just leave with this - where my object is to persuade, I won't mention this. Where my object is to describe the veracity of propositions, I'm under no obligation to present "worthy" opinions.

Then don't treat them as if they're worth anything if you don't think they're worth anything.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:42:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:30:15 PM, DanT wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

If that was what I was concerned about, than I would have mentioned you too.

Wrichcirw has been harassing me for months.

All I'll say is that DanT and I happen to be interested in similar topics...but for obviously completely different reasons. That would be fine if he was able to argue in a reasonable manner and offer constructive criticism, but I typically come out of a discussion with DanT regretting having had the discussion.

Anyway, from the debate in question, I lead my RFD with the following comment:

Interesting topic, so I will risk voting on it.
http://www.debate.org...

So, this is the risk. Catching the DDO version of AIDS, I mean DanT.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:44:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:41:38 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:37:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:31:24 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:

No, it's pretty much fact. Just saying "I recognize my political opinions are in the end arbitrary with no justifiable base," doesn't take away that fact and make your opinions worth anything.

Well it follows from my argument that nobody's opinion is worth anything. But I assume you're operative from a subjective, persuasive context and consistency through principle is what makes opinions compelling to others - and through admitting (what is an objective fact) that my opinion on ethics and policy is arbitrary and logically unjustifiable I've made it completely unpersuasive. So I'll just leave with this - where my object is to persuade, I won't mention this. Where my object is to describe the veracity of propositions, I'm under no obligation to present "worthy" opinions.

Then don't treat them as if they're worth anything if you don't think they're worth anything.

you're not listening. I said that where my object is to persuade, I will not mention that fact that nothing that throws "oughts" around is justifiable - and in that context I can treat the opinions as having worth.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 10:53:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:44:16 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:41:38 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:37:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:31:24 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:

No, it's pretty much fact. Just saying "I recognize my political opinions are in the end arbitrary with no justifiable base," doesn't take away that fact and make your opinions worth anything.

Well it follows from my argument that nobody's opinion is worth anything. But I assume you're operative from a subjective, persuasive context and consistency through principle is what makes opinions compelling to others - and through admitting (what is an objective fact) that my opinion on ethics and policy is arbitrary and logically unjustifiable I've made it completely unpersuasive. So I'll just leave with this - where my object is to persuade, I won't mention this. Where my object is to describe the veracity of propositions, I'm under no obligation to present "worthy" opinions.

Then don't treat them as if they're worth anything if you don't think they're worth anything.

you're not listening. I said that where my object is to persuade, I will not mention that fact that nothing that throws "oughts" around is justifiable - and in that context I can treat the opinions as having worth.

So in essence, you're fine with deception and dishonesty when it serves your purpose.

Gotcha.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 11:03:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:53:32 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:44:16 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:41:38 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:37:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:31:24 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:

No, it's pretty much fact. Just saying "I recognize my political opinions are in the end arbitrary with no justifiable base," doesn't take away that fact and make your opinions worth anything.

Well it follows from my argument that nobody's opinion is worth anything. But I assume you're operative from a subjective, persuasive context and consistency through principle is what makes opinions compelling to others - and through admitting (what is an objective fact) that my opinion on ethics and policy is arbitrary and logically unjustifiable I've made it completely unpersuasive. So I'll just leave with this - where my object is to persuade, I won't mention this. Where my object is to describe the veracity of propositions, I'm under no obligation to present "worthy" opinions.

Then don't treat them as if they're worth anything if you don't think they're worth anything.

you're not listening. I said that where my object is to persuade, I will not mention that fact that nothing that throws "oughts" around is justifiable - and in that context I can treat the opinions as having worth.

So in essence, you're fine with deception and dishonesty when it serves your purpose.

Gotcha.

It isn't an act of deception to withdraw from acknowledging a universal truth and appeal to subjectively persuasive principles. The fact is that we all have our ideas of how we think the world should run, we all have a code of ethics, and while rationally justifying them leads to dead ends, we still try to forward and encourage those beliefs regardless. This is what people (including you) do, even though this isn't what they think they do.

Your perspective is akin to holding someone at gunpoint. Uh! You've reached a truth about the nature of truth, now you can't argue with anyone anymore! That's impractical
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2013 11:12:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/19/2013 10:42:29 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:30:15 PM, DanT wrote:
At 7/19/2013 10:00:36 PM, imabench wrote:
DanT is b*tching because Wrichcirw voted against him in a recent debate (not a votebomb either, it was a 3-0 vote) and he cant convince him to change his vote.

http://www.debate.org...

So yeah. Everyone just move along, nothing to see here.

If that was what I was concerned about, than I would have mentioned you too.

Wrichcirw has been harassing me for months.

All I'll say is that DanT and I happen to be interested in similar topics...but for obviously completely different reasons. That would be fine if he was able to argue in a reasonable manner and offer constructive criticism, but I typically come out of a discussion with DanT regretting having had the discussion.

I gotta love how you throw that word around so loosly. You can't just label a criticism as constructive, it has to serve a useful purpose to the person receiving the criticism.

His idea of a constructive criticism is

"'DanT is always right'.

Perhaps when you learn to read, you will be able to figure out if I'm telling the truth with that statement."

His criticisms of me are almost never constructive. They usually start out as minor nonconstructive criticisms, than they devolve into insults like the one above, than they devolve even further into insults like;

"DanT said '[BLAH BLAH BLAH I HAVE AIDS]'

'DanT is always right.'"

About a month ago I thought we were having a reasonable conversation, and that we were actually getting along, but only a few posts in he started insulting me out of the blue. Complete left turn. Should have guessed it was going to turn south, seeing as in the initial post he called me his "parrot" because I agreed with him.

Anyway, from the debate in question, I lead my RFD with the following comment:

Interesting topic, so I will risk voting on it.
http://www.debate.org...

So, this is the risk. Catching the DDO version of AIDS, I mean DanT.

Again with the insults
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle