Total Posts:102|Showing Posts:91-102|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Tough Questions Special E1: Coveny and Mikal

TUF
Posts: 23,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2018 7:06:06 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/11/2018 7:03:01 PM, Coveny wrote:
At 1/11/2018 6:44:32 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/10/2018 2:49:52 PM, philochristos wrote:
So the very first edition of Tough Questions is a special edition? Or is there another episode that I can't find? Or is every episode going to be special?

This one is special. Most won't be like this, it will just be me airmax and the interviewee. We had a public forum thing here where multiple people were allowed in because the drama was a big event so we are using this as kind of a teaser for the show which will be airing in a few months probably.

Yes tell me more about how drama was a big event and you were able to use all the interest to advertise your interviews. (oh the irony...)

Not sure why you are trying to start sh1t again randomly. More to the point, drama fits a bit with the theme of the podcast, so I don't find the irony. Anyway, if you want to talk smack hit me up in a hangout, I tire of doing whatever this will become.
Breaking Bad Mafia Claimslist: https://docs.google.com...

: At 1/14/2018 2:16:34 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
: Pie is either scum or town.
Coveny
Posts: 701
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2018 7:53:40 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/11/2018 7:06:06 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/11/2018 7:03:01 PM, Coveny wrote:
At 1/11/2018 6:44:32 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/10/2018 2:49:52 PM, philochristos wrote:
So the very first edition of Tough Questions is a special edition? Or is there another episode that I can't find? Or is every episode going to be special?

This one is special. Most won't be like this, it will just be me airmax and the interviewee. We had a public forum thing here where multiple people were allowed in because the drama was a big event so we are using this as kind of a teaser for the show which will be airing in a few months probably.

Yes tell me more about how drama was a big event and you were able to use all the interest to advertise your interviews. (oh the irony...)

Not sure why you are trying to start sh1t again randomly. More to the point, drama fits a bit with the theme of the podcast, so I don't find the irony. Anyway, if you want to talk smack hit me up in a hangout, I tire of doing whatever this will become.

I wasn't starting sh1t and it sure wasn't "random". Drama generated a lot of interest you are now capitalising on, which as I recalled, you had the stance that it's not effective advertising when I did it, but your statement just now sure seem sounded like you understand that it's good advertising for what YOU are doing. Even going so far as to call out the drama as a selling point/theme of the podcast. This is a debate website, if we disagree and then use the same mechanism in the same way that you passed judgement on me for, and dismissed as ineffective, and you don't think that's starting that debate back up? Somehow it's my fault again, and you are again innocent? As I recall in the hangout you backed off on all three of your points against me. (Did start it with me, was a douche to start it after the game was over, and that I did not in fact stir the pot a day later after it "died down" but was waiting for a debate challenge) What you spoke of WAS the topic of the podcast, and you have been outspoken about how ineffective the method is when I used it, you want to change your stance and agree with me that drama sells, I'm cool, say the word, and I'll drop this whole thing. But you don't get to condemn it AND use it as a advertising tool, and not consider that stirring the pot with me.

That said I accept YOUR smack talk challenge if you wish to engage in it. However this evening I have a switches to replace so it'll have to be tomorrow night or this weekend. If you're still interested. Of the smack talkers I've dealt with on here I view you as one of the best (love your subtle insults with plausible deniability), and I'd enjoy going another round with ya when I'm not distracted... if you are so inclined. Or we can debate that advertising through drama works. (it's not like it wouldn't be a free win for you as voters biased against me don't even need to follow the rules and still get their votes through) Pick your poison, I don't care whichever way you decide.
ForDebating.com is coming in February. (hopefully) A head to head debating website that I hope to populate with intelligent critical thinkers who debate interesting and controversial topics.

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com...
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com...
Comparison chart - https://docs.google.com...
TUF
Posts: 23,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2018 8:21:36 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/11/2018 7:53:40 PM, Coveny wrote:
At 1/11/2018 7:06:06 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/11/2018 7:03:01 PM, Coveny wrote:
At 1/11/2018 6:44:32 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/10/2018 2:49:52 PM, philochristos wrote:
So the very first edition of Tough Questions is a special edition? Or is there another episode that I can't find? Or is every episode going to be special?

This one is special. Most won't be like this, it will just be me airmax and the interviewee. We had a public forum thing here where multiple people were allowed in because the drama was a big event so we are using this as kind of a teaser for the show which will be airing in a few months probably.

Yes tell me more about how drama was a big event and you were able to use all the interest to advertise your interviews. (oh the irony...)

Not sure why you are trying to start sh1t again randomly. More to the point, drama fits a bit with the theme of the podcast, so I don't find the irony. Anyway, if you want to talk smack hit me up in a hangout, I tire of doing whatever this will become.

I wasn't starting sh1t and it sure wasn't "random". Drama generated a lot of interest you are now capitalising on, which as I recalled, you had the stance that it's not effective advertising when I did it, but your statement just now sure seem sounded like you understand that it's good advertising for what YOU are doing.

I want you to go back through whatever posts you are referring to and qoute me. If you can find where I said advertising through drama in ineffective I will concede this point. I know for a fact I didn't say this, but since you are saying I did, please provide the context. Advertising through drama is effective for building a portfolio for something centered around drama, which is why I mentioned this works for Alex Jones (this is an example you love). My point was that you don't want to attract people to your website through drama alone, you want to build your website as a community building place, you yourself have said you have high standards for the site and won't accept people who don't act in such a way.

Even going so far as to call out the drama as a selling point/theme of the podcast.

It's called "TUF questions", which obviously means it's not an interview where we ask light and fluffy questions. Do you feel the questions we asked in your interview were light and fluffy?

This is a debate website, if we disagree and then use the same mechanism in the same way that you passed judgement on me for, and dismissed as ineffective, and you don't think that's starting that debate back up? Somehow it's my fault again, and you are again innocent? As I recall in the hangout you backed off on all three of your points against me.

In the hangout I backed off of this, it was the post where you said I said you should have known that claiming your role was bad. And you had the post ready, and I didn't have it ready so I had no clue what you were talking about. In context to what I actually said, you were clearly twisting what I had said to make me seem douchier in that post than I actually was. I took a coaching style approach to that post where you were trying to mis-represent what I had said in a way that made me sound as if I was belittling you in that post, which is why I screencapped the post over that part of the interview. Context is very important.

(Did start it with me, was a douche to start it after the game was over,

I did tease you after the game was over. I maintain that what you did in return was much worse which was hypocritical, not that I particularly care that you insulted me. I just find if you have to resort to insults instead of logic, it's an argument not worth my time.

and that I did not in fact stir the pot a day later after it "died down" but was waiting for a debate challenge)

Wrong, you did stir the pot, and even admitted it in the interview. I posted screenshots of where you did in the video. You even said so yourself that you bumped it because mikal had called you out which is how you justified bumping the drama.

What you spoke of WAS the topic of the podcast, and you have been outspoken about how ineffective the method is when I used it, you want to change your stance and agree with me that drama sells, I'm cool, say the word, and I'll drop this whole thing. But you don't get to condemn it AND use it as a advertising tool, and not consider that stirring the pot with me.

Your perception of my stance is incorrect. So join in a hangout and I'll explain to you.

That said I accept YOUR smack talk challenge if you wish to engage in it. However this evening I have a switches to replace so it'll have to be tomorrow night or this weekend. If you're still interested. Of the smack talkers I've dealt with on here I view you as one of the best (love your subtle insults with plausible deniability),

lol okay whatever.

and I'd enjoy going another round with ya when I'm not distracted... if you are so inclined. Or we can debate that advertising through drama works. (it's not like it wouldn't be a free win for you as voters biased against me don't even need to follow the rules and still get their votes through) Pick your poison, I don't care whichever way you decide.

I'll take you up on the debate. Advertising through drama is effective in the correct market, but I'll debate specifically how yours won't work for your website if you'd like.
And we can discuss in a hangout tonight if you want, I'll grab some vodka before hand. This isn't personal to me it's just a dis-agreement. I get in these with unstoppable, airmax, mikal even from time to time, and then we play games the next minute and are chatting friendly-like. Again I maintain that communication tends to get more hostile over text, which is why I prefer a live setting.
Breaking Bad Mafia Claimslist: https://docs.google.com...

: At 1/14/2018 2:16:34 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
: Pie is either scum or town.
Coveny
Posts: 701
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2018 9:07:01 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/11/2018 8:21:36 PM, TUF wrote:

I want you to go back through whatever posts you are referring to and qoute me. If you can find where I said advertising through drama in ineffective I will concede this point. I know for a fact I didn't say this, but since you are saying I did, please provide the context. Advertising through drama is effective for building a portfolio for something centered around drama, which is why I mentioned this works for Alex Jones (this is an example you love).

Well you sure seemed like your were in Mikal's camp on that topic, but I don't care to look through it as we seem to agree on both its effectiveness.

My point was that you don't want to attract people to your website through drama alone, you want to build your website as a community building place, you yourself have said you have high standards for the site and won't accept people who don't act in such a way.

Agreed. I'm only used the technique here because of the level of spam, and trolls. I wouldn't say "high standards" if you go to most of the successful forums the general theme is similar on keeping trolls, flame wars, and harassment of other members from happening. The one I consider having high standards is the one where you have to pay money to join, they allow zero forms of advertising, or offtopic discussion, going so far as to say they don't want you if you want to cause trouble, and when they ban you, you will not get a refund. haha

It's called "TUF questions", which obviously means it's not an interview where we ask light and fluffy questions. Do you feel the questions we asked in your interview were light and fluffy?

Ah the subtle digs, I love them man. No I feel like my "interview" was turned into a live debate where Mikal hogged the mic. Of course Mikal is your friend though right? (see I can do subtle digs too...)

In the hangout I backed off of this, it was the post where you said I said you should have known that claiming your role was bad. And you had the post ready, and I didn't have it ready so I had no clue what you were talking about. In context to what I actually said, you were clearly twisting what I had said to make me seem douchier in that post than I actually was. I took a coaching style approach to that post where you were trying to mis-represent what I had said in a way that made me sound as if I was belittling you in that post, which is why I screencapped the post over that part of the interview. Context is very important.

I don't believe you took a "coaching style approach" nor that I twisted what you said, but I don't care that much about it to debate it.

I did tease you after the game was over. I maintain that what you did in return was much worse which was hypocritical, not that I particularly care that you insulted me. I just find if you have to resort to insults instead of logic, it's an argument not worth my time.

Back with the hypocritical thing. Let me try this again. If someone breaks into your house trying to kill you, and you shoot them are you a murder? Has shooting them show that you are a hypocrite? Methinks not, but apparently you do.

Wrong, you did stir the pot, and even admitted it in the interview. I posted screenshots of where you did in the video. You even said so yourself that you bumped it because mikal had called you out which is how you justified bumping the drama.


Mikal says he's going to "trounce" me in a debate, and will send me a challenge, I accept, and don't talk any smack because back because the debate in supposed to be incoming, a day later still no challenge, and I then return fire because he talked sh1t and then didn't back it up. That's not ME starting anything, that's not me not letting something die, you are wrong, and you need to stop trying to frame it like that. There was a threat of a debate, I said ok, no debate was issued, I said where is that threat you were so proud of? That's not ME bumping anything.


Your perception of my stance is incorrect. So join in a hangout and I'll explain to you.

You can call it me misunderstanding, or whatever. If your in agreement I don't care, and there is nothing to debate.

I'll take you up on the debate. Advertising through drama is effective in the correct market, but I'll debate specifically how yours won't work for your website if you'd like.

Get the topic hashed out, and your on.
And we can discuss in a hangout tonight if you want, I'll grab some vodka before hand. This isn't personal to me it's just a dis-agreement. I get in these with unstoppable, airmax, mikal even from time to time, and then we play games the next minute and are chatting friendly-like. Again I maintain that communication tends to get more hostile over text, which is why I prefer a live setting.

No we can't I have to change out two production switches tonight, and likely won't be back on here till tomorrow. But I'm definitely down with the friendly and disagreeable relationship dynamic, that's the only model I can make work because I have yet to meet someone who I don't disagree with in some capacity...
ForDebating.com is coming in February. (hopefully) A head to head debating website that I hope to populate with intelligent critical thinkers who debate interesting and controversial topics.

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com...
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com...
Comparison chart - https://docs.google.com...
TUF
Posts: 23,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2018 9:38:30 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
I'll cut out the parts of the reply we seem to agree on and I see going nowhere.

At 1/11/2018 9:07:01 PM, Coveny wrote:
At 1/11/2018 8:21:36 PM, TUF wrote:
My point was that you don't want to attract people to your website through drama alone, you want to build your website as a community building place, you yourself have said you have high standards for the site and won't accept people who don't act in such a way.

Agreed. I'm only used the technique here because of the level of spam, and trolls.

So are you trying to appeal to the spammers and trolls with your advertising? Why...?

It's called "TUF questions", which obviously means it's not an interview where we ask light and fluffy questions. Do you feel the questions we asked in your interview were light and fluffy?

Ah the subtle digs, I love them man. No I feel like my "interview" was turned into a live debate where Mikal hogged the mic. Of course Mikal is your friend though right? (see I can do subtle digs too...)

I don't see how you interpreted that as a dig. This is probably another classic example of mis-interpreting text, which is again why I prefer discussion via hangouts.
https://www.youtube.com...
But yes, this was supposed to be more centered as a debate instead of purely an interview, which is why max clarified that this is a special episode. There was one specific part where mike cut you off, and you cut him off and chewed him out for it and he let you continue, so I think you could have easily done that at any point as well. The set-up for the whole thing was pretty impromptu and set up last minute but if you prefer a debate setting where each person gets a certain time allotment to speak un-interupted, that can easily be arranged. People do live debates like that all the time, I am sure someone would take you up on that style.

I did tease you after the game was over. I maintain that what you did in return was much worse which was hypocritical, not that I particularly care that you insulted me. I just find if you have to resort to insults instead of logic, it's an argument not worth my time.

Back with the hypocritical thing. Let me try this again. If someone breaks into your house trying to kill you, and you shoot them are you a murder? Has shooting them show that you are a hypocrite? Methinks not, but apparently you do.

This is a slippery slope. Your taking point A all the way to point Z and missing everything in between to make the point suit you. Perspective is obviously a factor here. I could make an example too that you might find as just ridiculous, but it's the way I see it. Here's one: I tapped you playfully on the shoulder, and in response you hit me over the head with a shovel. You would probably argue that this hypothetical isn't true, but again, putting both perspectives in order that's how things look to both of us. A third party might have viewed it differently, or even thought both of us were in the wrong. At the end of the day I did apologize to you for thanking you for helping the mafia, both in the endgame thread and in the live hangout that was recorded. I don't see the point in beating this dead horse. I only brought this up because you said I conceded that I did not in our interview, which is what should be the topic of this discussion.

Wrong, you did stir the pot, and even admitted it in the interview. I posted screenshots of where you did in the video. You even said so yourself that you bumped it because mikal had called you out which is how you justified bumping the drama.


Mikal says he's going to "trounce" me in a debate, and will send me a challenge, I accept, and don't talk any smack because back because the debate in supposed to be incoming, a day later still no challenge, and I then return fire because he talked sh1t and then didn't back it up. That's not ME starting anything, that's not me not letting something die, you are wrong, and you need to stop trying to frame it like that. There was a threat of a debate, I said ok, no debate was issued, I said where is that threat you were so proud of? That's not ME bumping anything.

Why not just message mikal himself? Besides you had the last word at that point, why not just take the lack of a debate challenge as a victory? Well you clearly did because you posted to brag about it in the endgame thread after you had the last word for like 3 days.
You had the last word here: http://www.debate.org...
Here you tried to bait it again with no results: http://www.debate.org...
And then here you did it again: http://www.debate.org...

In the last post you clearly weren't referencing just Mikal, you said "Haters" plural in a thread where there were multiple people contending with you. So it was clear to me you were trying to bump the drama and not just to mikal. There was 3 full days where this whole thing that has spread and grown as big as it has now could have been nipped in the butt at any point during that time. Obviously you did want this, and you've since said that this was all for advertising purposes, so I don't understand why your trying to refute this.

I'll take you up on the debate. Advertising through drama is effective in the correct market, but I'll debate specifically how yours won't work for your website if you'd like.

Get the topic hashed out, and your on.

"Fordebating.com will not see a substantial gain in membership based on the site owners advertising methods on Debate.org"

How does that sound?

And we can discuss in a hangout tonight if you want, I'll grab some vodka before hand. This isn't personal to me it's just a dis-agreement. I get in these with unstoppable, airmax, mikal even from time to time, and then we play games the next minute and are chatting friendly-like. Again I maintain that communication tends to get more hostile over text, which is why I prefer a live setting.

No we can't I have to change out two production switches tonight, and likely won't be back on here till tomorrow. But I'm definitely down with the friendly and disagreeable relationship dynamic, that's the only model I can make work because I have yet to meet someone who I don't disagree with in some capacity...

Sounds good. I genuinely hope fordebating.com does well, despite my dis-agreements with how you advertise the website. Any increase challenging belief systems is good. I joined this site as a religious conservative and have pretty much flipped all my beliefs through debating. Any forum that encourages free thinking and challenges what you think you know, is good.
Breaking Bad Mafia Claimslist: https://docs.google.com...

: At 1/14/2018 2:16:34 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
: Pie is either scum or town.
philochristos
Posts: 3,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2018 1:03:14 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/11/2018 6:44:32 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/10/2018 2:49:52 PM, philochristos wrote:
So the very first edition of Tough Questions is a special edition? Or is there another episode that I can't find? Or is every episode going to be special?

This one is special. Most won't be like this, it will just be me airmax and the interviewee. We had a public forum thing here where multiple people were allowed in because the drama was a big event so we are using this as kind of a teaser for the show which will be airing in a few months probably.

I hope I'm still alive when that happens. It sounds like such a long way off!
"When a wise man has a controversy with a foolish man, the foolish man either rages or laughs, and there is no rest." ~Proverbs 29:9

"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
TUF
Posts: 23,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2018 1:09:11 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/12/2018 1:03:14 AM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/11/2018 6:44:32 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/10/2018 2:49:52 PM, philochristos wrote:
So the very first edition of Tough Questions is a special edition? Or is there another episode that I can't find? Or is every episode going to be special?

This one is special. Most won't be like this, it will just be me airmax and the interviewee. We had a public forum thing here where multiple people were allowed in because the drama was a big event so we are using this as kind of a teaser for the show which will be airing in a few months probably.

I hope I'm still alive when that happens. It sounds like such a long way off!

We decided to release on a weekly basis and get all of post production out of the way early so there isn't prolonged waits between each episode
Breaking Bad Mafia Claimslist: https://docs.google.com...

: At 1/14/2018 2:16:34 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
: Pie is either scum or town.
philochristos
Posts: 3,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2018 1:11:38 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/12/2018 1:09:11 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/12/2018 1:03:14 AM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/11/2018 6:44:32 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/10/2018 2:49:52 PM, philochristos wrote:
So the very first edition of Tough Questions is a special edition? Or is there another episode that I can't find? Or is every episode going to be special?

This one is special. Most won't be like this, it will just be me airmax and the interviewee. We had a public forum thing here where multiple people were allowed in because the drama was a big event so we are using this as kind of a teaser for the show which will be airing in a few months probably.

I hope I'm still alive when that happens. It sounds like such a long way off!

We decided to release on a weekly basis and get all of post production out of the way early so there isn't prolonged waits between each episode

That sounds like a good strategy. Are they all going to be audio only? Some video would be nice. Just sayin'! :-)
"When a wise man has a controversy with a foolish man, the foolish man either rages or laughs, and there is no rest." ~Proverbs 29:9

"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
TUF
Posts: 23,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2018 9:44:25 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/12/2018 1:11:38 AM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/12/2018 1:09:11 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/12/2018 1:03:14 AM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/11/2018 6:44:32 PM, TUF wrote:
At 1/10/2018 2:49:52 PM, philochristos wrote:
So the very first edition of Tough Questions is a special edition? Or is there another episode that I can't find? Or is every episode going to be special?

This one is special. Most won't be like this, it will just be me airmax and the interviewee. We had a public forum thing here where multiple people were allowed in because the drama was a big event so we are using this as kind of a teaser for the show which will be airing in a few months probably.

I hope I'm still alive when that happens. It sounds like such a long way off!

We decided to release on a weekly basis and get all of post production out of the way early so there isn't prolonged waits between each episode

That sounds like a good strategy. Are they all going to be audio only? Some video would be nice. Just sayin'! :-)

I don't have a working webcam. Not sure Max wants to either. I suppose I can go buy a new one lol. But I don't want to require people to get one for the interview.
Breaking Bad Mafia Claimslist: https://docs.google.com...

: At 1/14/2018 2:16:34 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
: Pie is either scum or town.
Coveny
Posts: 701
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2018 12:44:07 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/11/2018 9:38:30 PM, TUF wrote:
I'll cut out the parts of the reply we seem to agree on and I see going nowhere.

At 1/11/2018 9:07:01 PM, Coveny wrote:
At 1/11/2018 8:21:36 PM, TUF wrote:
My point was that you don't want to attract people to your website through drama alone, you want to build your website as a community building place, you yourself have said you have high standards for the site and won't accept people who don't act in such a way.

Agreed. I'm only used the technique here because of the level of spam, and trolls.

So are you trying to appeal to the spammers and trolls with your advertising? Why...?

No I'm trying to appeal to spammers and trolls. haha I'm adapting to the environment I'm advertising in. When you have a bunch of spam you need to set yourself apart from the other advertisers. When you have a bunch of trolls they are going to give you flak even if you didn't advertise, and much more so when you do advertise. While you seem to disagree, I believe that a hostile environment like DDO requires a more aggressive advertising path. I'm posting on like 10 different debate forums and this is the only one where I do name calling, or allow myself to have this level of aggression and conflict.

I don't see how you interpreted that as a dig. This is probably another classic example of mis-interpreting text, which is again why I prefer discussion via hangouts.
https://www.youtube.com...

So you don't take "obviously means it's not an interview where we ask light and fluffy questions." as an implication that I want light and fluffy questions, or that I can't handle light and fluffy question? If it's obvious what it means then why do you need to state it, and direct it toward me if it's not a dig?

But yes, this was supposed to be more centered as a debate instead of purely an interview, which is why max clarified that this is a special episode. There was one specific part where mike cut you off, and you cut him off and chewed him out for it and he let you continue, so I think you could have easily done that at any point as well. The set-up for the whole thing was pretty impromptu and set up last minute but if you prefer a debate setting where each person gets a certain time allotment to speak un-interupted, that can easily be arranged. People do live debates like that all the time, I am sure someone would take you up on that style.

So if I wanted more time... I should have fought for it? haha Well I can't disagree with that advice, but had a different agenda with the live debate than a bar fight, and I was happy with the results.

This is a slippery slope. Your taking point A all the way to point Z and missing everything in between to make the point suit you. Perspective is obviously a factor here. I could make an example too that you might find as just ridiculous, but it's the way I see it. Here's one: I tapped you playfully on the shoulder, and in response you hit me over the head with a shovel. You would probably argue that this hypothetical isn't true, but again, putting both perspectives in order that's how things look to both of us. A third party might have viewed it differently, or even thought both of us were in the wrong.


You removed the equality part. Someone tries to kill you, you kill them are equal, just as you giving me sh1t, and me giving you sh1t are equal. A tap on the shoulder and a shovel to the head are NOT equal, and therefore not a logical analogy.

At the end of the day I did apologize to you for thanking you for helping the mafia, both in the endgame thread and in the live hangout that was recorded. I don't see the point in beating this dead horse. I only brought this up because you said I conceded that I did not in our interview, which is what should be the topic of this discussion.

I felt like it was a token apology not a heartfelt one. Similar to when someone says they are sorry your feelings got hurt. Even now with this "I didn't conceded" indicates you don't feel like you've done any wrong doing, and if that's the case then you apology doesn't have any value in my opinion.


Why not just message mikal himself? Besides you had the last word at that point, why not just take the lack of a debate challenge as a victory?

Mikal challenged me publicly in the thread, and I responded publicly to him in the thread. Why didn't HE contact ME privately. He made the challenge that I responded in the same venue the challenge was issued, and yet somehow you blame me for "bumping" the thread? Debating Mikal was the goal. Why do you think I chose him to debate over the other people in the thread? Respect is earned challenging the toughest, and the top of the ELO board has Mikal's name on it for everyone to see. He hadn't debated in MONTHS, so I had given up on him till he came in all hot and heavy, then I was like oh this is great, and switched targets.

Well you clearly did because you posted to brag about it in the endgame thread after you had the last word for like 3 days.

If you get the first word, I get the last word... equality. (Mikal understood this with the way he setup the debate so that I forfeited the last round, and HE got the last word which I honored) This belief of yours that I'm supposed to walk away from challenges and insults doesn't work for me.

In the last post you clearly weren't referencing just Mikal, you said "Haters" plural in a thread where there were multiple people contending with you. So it was clear to me you were trying to bump the drama and not just to mikal. There was 3 full days where this whole thing that has spread and grown as big as it has now could have been nipped in the butt at any point during that time. Obviously you did want this, and you've since said that this was all for advertising purposes, so I don't understand why your trying to refute this.


Yes I did want want the debate with Mikal, but I have certain personal ethics/morals which you seem to be overlooking. Part of that code means that I let stuff go if the other person lets stuff go. Mikal did NOT let it go, so I have no ethical issues baiting him for my personal interests. You let it go, I let it go. When you say I acted otherwise, this is what I am refuting.


"Fordebating.com will not see a substantial gain in membership based on the site owners advertising methods on Debate.org"

How does that sound?

Acceptable.

Sounds good. I genuinely hope fordebating.com does well, despite my dis-agreements with how you advertise the website. Any increase challenging belief systems is good. I joined this site as a religious conservative and have pretty much flipped all my beliefs through debating. Any forum that encourages free thinking and challenges what you think you know, is good.

Thanks. I agree with challenging beliefs and I'm a HUGE fan of both critical and free thinking that goes beyond what we are programmed to think and feel. The offer to moderate is open to you. You strike me as intelligent, and able to adapt. You seem to want power, and are more charismatic than me. If you are interested in growing the community, and you are willing to put aside some of your competitive nature I think it could be mutually beneficial. You make friends, keep the community positive/receptive, and I'll deal with the hostile/belligerent users and work on trying to drive traffic to the website with my shoe string advertising budget.
ForDebating.com is coming in February. (hopefully) A head to head debating website that I hope to populate with intelligent critical thinkers who debate interesting and controversial topics.

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com...
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com...
Comparison chart - https://docs.google.com...
TUF
Posts: 23,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2018 11:53:47 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/12/2018 12:44:07 PM, Coveny wrote:
So you don't take "obviously means it's not an interview where we ask light and fluffy questions." as an implication that I want light and fluffy questions, or that I can't handle light and fluffy question? If it's obvious what it means then why do you need to state it, and direct it toward me if it's not a dig?

Nah your assuming that was a dig, and you've explained why. I wasn't trying to insinuate that you don't know what "Tough questions" are or couldn't take the questions. On the contrary I think you did rather well defending yourself with them. I was trying to get you to admit that the questions weren't light hearted and fluffy, plain and simple. I wasn't saying you couldn't take the questions. Point is this is a podcast focusing on drama incidents where we don't focus on fluffy sh1t, so yes, our audience is specifically catered to drama.

So if I wanted more time... I should have fought for it? haha Well I can't disagree with that advice, but had a different agenda with the live debate than a bar fight, and I was happy with the results.

I don't hold it to the standard of a bar fight. Mikal was aggressive, but so were you. I think you both made logical points, albeit being aggressive.

You removed the equality part. Someone tries to kill you, you kill them are equal, just as you giving me sh1t, and me giving you sh1t are equal. A tap on the shoulder and a shovel to the head are NOT equal, and therefore not a logical analogy.

You are again removing perspective so it only benefits you. I agree a shovel to the head isn't equal to my tap on the shoulder tease to you. That's exactly my point lol.

I felt like it was a token apology not a heartfelt one. Similar to when someone says they are sorry your feelings got hurt. Even now with this "I didn't conceded" indicates you don't feel like you've done any wrong doing, and if that's the case then you apology doesn't have any value in my opinion.

It isn't heartfelt, not anymore that is. It was initially, but your reaction removed my sympathy. I do agree on a logical context that I re-instigated it initially in my endgame post, and when you reacted I apologized. When you turned on me ten-fold, my apology felt like it was taken a ripe sh1t on, so while I admit I re-started it, I don't necessarily feel bad anymore for what I had said.

Mikal challenged me publicly in the thread, and I responded publicly to him in the thread. Why didn't HE contact ME privately.
He made the challenge that I responded in the same venue the challenge was issued, and yet somehow you blame me for "bumping" the thread? Debating Mikal was the goal. Why do you think I chose him to debate over the other people in the thread? Respect is earned challenging the toughest, and the top of the ELO board has Mikal's name on it for everyone to see. He hadn't debated in MONTHS, so I had given up on him till he came in all hot and heavy, then I was like oh this is great, and switched targets.

In context to bumping the drama, that is irrelevant. You could have taken having the last word as a victory. You didn't because you bumped the thread three times.

Well you clearly did because you posted to brag about it in the endgame thread after you had the last word for like 3 days.

If you get the first word, I get the last word... equality.

But three times? Last word is one thing, 3 last words is obviously provoking the drama, re-kindling an old flame.

(Mikal understood this with the way he setup the debate so that I forfeited the last round, and HE got the last word which I honored) This belief of yours that I'm supposed to walk away from challenges and insults doesn't work for me.

Sweet, then you are admitting that because of pride, you re-kindled the drama. That means the victim card doesn't work anymore for you. The one where you keep saying everyone else keeps starting this and you are defending yourself? You have readily admitted to kindling the bonfire of this drama due to pride. Glad we got that established and can move past this.

Yes I did want want the debate with Mikal, but I have certain personal ethics/morals which you seem to be overlooking. Part of that code means that I let stuff go if the other person lets stuff go. Mikal did NOT let it go, so I have no ethical issues baiting him for my personal interests. You let it go, I let it go. When you say I acted otherwise, this is what I am refuting.

More admittance you re-kindling the drama which could have easily ended with you having the last word. Perfect, we are gaining ground here!
Breaking Bad Mafia Claimslist: https://docs.google.com...

: At 1/14/2018 2:16:34 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
: Pie is either scum or town.
Coveny
Posts: 701
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2018 3:35:31 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 1/12/2018 11:53:47 PM, TUF wrote:

You are again removing perspective so it only benefits you. I agree a shovel to the head isn't equal to my tap on the shoulder tease to you. That's exactly my point lol.

I'm removing perspective? How? You were the one who remove the equality perspective because it benefits your claim of a slippery slope. I've explained why your analogy is not the same as the other two and therefore why there isn't a slippery slope, explain your accusations of how I removed perspective or recant...

It isn't heartfelt, not anymore that is. It was initially, but your reaction removed my sympathy. I do agree on a logical context that I re-instigated it initially in my endgame post, and when you reacted I apologized. When you turned on me ten-fold, my apology felt like it was taken a ripe sh1t on, so while I admit I re-started it, I don't necessarily feel bad anymore for what I had said.


I'm not looking for you to feel bad dude. I mean I think you should change some of the philosophies you have on life, but that's just something to spare about. It didn't seem or feel heartfelt to me. Let me repost it and do a bit of highlighting:

I mean I was mafia, so I wouldn't take most of the in game stuff I said seriously. The goal is literally to BS yourself to victory. I got you talking and got you into debate mode, which was good as it got people really dis-interested in the game. Common scum play tactic, it worked on you because you were so new.
That's funny, because you were literally bragging about being right after DP1 even though A. I was scum so I am supposed to be pushing mis-lynches, and B. DD was your major lynch candidate and he was still town XD
I am sorry man, no hard feelings. Mafia is a game that is very manipulation heavy, so you kind of have to be an assertive @sshole sometimes. I get that it's not your type of game, but after a while you kind of get used to that playstyle and can call it out easier. It wasn't really a barb though, you genuinely helped scum even if it was un-intentional and out of in-experience. I wouldn't take it too hard, you obviously didn't like the game, which is fine. GG, and good luck to you in your future endeavors.


So you're sorry about the stuff I shouldn't take seriously because you intentionally spun me up. You found my actions humorous because they were so un-intentional and out of in-experience. But hey I'm sorry, no hard feelings... that's what a heartfelt apology looks like in your world? Ya I'm not buying.
http://www.debate.org...

In context to bumping the drama, that is irrelevant. You could have taken having the last word as a victory. You didn't because you bumped the thread three times.


It's not irrelevant Mikal had the first and last word at that point. I waited for the debate rather than taking the last word, when the debate didn't show up, I took the last word. Are you literally saying you don't understand how getting Mikal to debate me after he hasn't debated in months isn't relevant? You don't think that's an accomplishment? I'd love to hear you support that position...

But three times? Last word is one thing, 3 last words is obviously provoking the drama, re-kindling an old flame.


Two times
#70 on the 19th - I didn't consider this smack talk, but more of a hey where did everyone go? (the 18th had 19 posts in that thread) However in retrospect I can see how you would see the picture as me saying I defeated all the haters even though I was just making a joke about how everything died down from 19 posts a day to zero. You consider this dig (even though you don't consider the fluffy questions a dig at me...) and I dispute both of those.
#71 on the 21st - the "last word" smack talk version of the previous post. Should be pretty easy to see the difference: gauntlet, haters, life was good.
http://www.debate.org...

Sweet, then you are admitting that because of pride, you re-kindled the drama. That means the victim card doesn't work anymore for you. The one where you keep saying everyone else keeps starting this and you are defending yourself? You have readily admitted to kindling the bonfire of this drama due to pride. Glad we got that established and can move past this.

Pride? Who said anything about pride? Dude I don't think you listen to me. This is a quote from Michael Josephson on the topic "What you allow you encourage". Does that sound anything remotely like pride? What part of my bald fat a$$ radiates pride? If you must label me something to be able to understand me, label me a redneck who likes to fight. This has NOTHING to do with pride. It was pride I wouldn't let people walk away I would just keep hammering them like a ten penny nail.

I did NOT rekindle the drama, Mikal threw a barb, and I returned fire after he didn't follow through with what he said he was going to do after giving him 3 days. (which I felt was generous) He could have gotten the last word had he remembered to create the debate, as it allows me to return fire in a structured way which is my preference, but he didn't so I took what was due me. Had he not created the debate I would have left him alone at that point as I had my last word.


More admittance you re-kindling the drama which could have easily ended with you having the last word. Perfect, we are gaining ground here!

You just skip the whole ethics part and strawman me again. Yes I could and did end it easily with the last word. You want to debate I double dipped you'll have to prove me saying "where'd everyone go?" is worse than you saying "obviously we don't have fluffy questions, did we ask you fluffy questions?". If you can do that, then "we" can gain ground here.
ForDebating.com is coming in February. (hopefully) A head to head debating website that I hope to populate with intelligent critical thinkers who debate interesting and controversial topics.

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com...
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com...
Comparison chart - https://docs.google.com...