Joined: 03 Mar 2008 Posts: 5704 Location: New York City
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:51 pm Title: RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:
Fletch_Talon wrote:
A Guy wrote:
So I was insulted because you didn't go back and read my previous points? That's why? Oh, I get it, I'm supposed to repeat myself every page or so in order for my argument to be valid.
And how does a counter-argument have nothing to do with an argument? Anyways, I'm taking a break from all this arguing today. I'll argue with you tomorrow.
alright, first and foremost see this
Quote:
also sorry i cracked before, it just gets annoying coming back after a good nights sleep to find that most things you say seem to go in one ear and out the other, and then to top it all off you see YOU GOT PWNED posted in a debate that you thought was finally (however slowly) becoming more civilised and intelligent.
thats a few posts after i "called" you and Guest1 idiots, i admit it was an overreaction, but certain comments had been pushing me just that little bit more each time until i just needed to tear into someone, specifically Guest1, but because it was your comment he was agreeing with you got caught in the cross fire
long story short, if it was an apology you wanted, you already got it a month ago when the event actually took place, also note that that makes twice when ive lost my temper as opposed to Guest1 who goes off without provocation, so i resent being called a hypocrite when at least i attempt to restrain myself and in my opinion i put up with a crapload more than he does
and hopefully this is the last time i have to say this, your counter arguement had nothing to do with what we (myself and ratchet) were saying
you asked for proof that spyro was coming back
neither ratchet nor i said he was, why would we have proof for something we were not saying
and lack of evidence cannot be used to prove something
"I am a time travelling doctor from the planet Gallifrey, because you cant prove I'm not"
of course i cant prove that i am, hence the problem with abov statement
we asked you for proof as to why old spyro isnt coming back, your reply was that we cant prove otherwise, which makes it sound like you think that
proof that spyro is coming back = 0
therefore spyro isnt coming back
and thats just bad logic
Well, apparently, I "missed" your apology just like you "missed" my points.
And yes, as the person couldn't prove that they are a time-traveling doctor, then my argument would be valid.
And people don't like to be insulted without a good reason.
Joined: 28 May 2008 Posts: 785 Location: Merry Ol' Land of Oz
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 3:14 am Title: RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:
A Guy wrote:
So I was insulted because you didn't go back and read my previous points? That's why? Oh, I get it, I'm supposed to repeat myself every page or so in order for my argument to be valid.
And how does a counter-argument have nothing to do with an argument? Anyways, I'm taking a break from all this arguing today. I'll argue with you tomorrow.
alright, first and foremost see this
Quote:
also sorry i cracked before, it just gets annoying coming back after a good nights sleep to find that most things you say seem to go in one ear and out the other, and then to top it all off you see YOU GOT PWNED posted in a debate that you thought was finally (however slowly) becoming more civilised and intelligent.
thats a few posts after i "called" you and Guest1 idiots, i admit it was an overreaction, but certain comments had been pushing me just that little bit more each time until i just needed to tear into someone, specifically Guest1, but because it was your comment he was agreeing with you got caught in the cross fire
long story short, if it was an apology you wanted, you already got it a month ago when the event actually took place, also note that that makes twice when ive lost my temper as opposed to Guest1 who goes off without provocation, so i resent being called a hypocrite when at least i attempt to restrain myself and in my opinion i put up with a crapload more than he does
and hopefully this is the last time i have to say this, your counter arguement had nothing to do with what we (myself and ratchet) were saying
you asked for proof that spyro was coming back
neither ratchet nor i said he was, why would we have proof for something we were not saying
and lack of evidence cannot be used to prove something
"I am a time travelling doctor from the planet Gallifrey, because you cant prove I'm not"
of course i cant prove that i am, hence the problem with abov statement
we asked you for proof as to why old spyro isnt coming back, your reply was that we cant prove otherwise, which makes it sound like you think that
proof that spyro is coming back = 0
therefore spyro isnt coming back
Uh, using a question to counter another question is a common counter-argument. So from what you're saying, the person that asks the question first is more right than the person who asks the question after.
the problem isnt just that you countered a question with a question, its the fact that the question you asked of me (or ratchet, i cant remember) had nothing to do with the argument you asked for proof that spyro is coming back but we never said he was, all we said that there is insufficient evidence to say that he never will
as i said before, its something that happens whenever atheists and theists have an arguement, an atheist will say you cant prove god exists, and the theist will say "well you cant prove he doesnt" the problem with that is
a) evidence is used to prove a point, and lack of evidence is used to disprove a point (at least temporarily)
b) the atheist did not necessarily say god doesnt exist, an atheist might instead be arguing that its silly to believe something exists without evidence for it
so its not just the way you countered a question with a question, its the fact that the question you used to do so, didnt refer to the arguements we had been making, it was effectively putting words in our mouth
Quote:
I already said why I like the new Spyro better. Apparently, you didn't read any of my arguments.
just because you previously stated a reason for something doesnt mean that in the future you can just state the opinion and expect everyone to know how you feel that way, also the reasoning that you should have posted is the evidence you have that old spyro isnt coming back, thats what was asked of you and the way you responded made it seem that your only evidence for your point was the lack of evidence for the polar opposite
So I was insulted because you didn't go back and read my previous points? That's why? Oh, I get it, I'm supposed to repeat myself every page or so in order for my argument to be valid.
And how does a counter-argument have nothing to do with an argument? Anyways, I'm taking a break from all this arguing today. I'll argue with you tomorrow.
Joined: 28 May 2008 Posts: 785 Location: Merry Ol' Land of Oz
Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 2:18 am Title: RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:
A Guy wrote:
Uh, using a question to counter another question is a common counter-argument. So from what you're saying, the person that asks the question first is more right than the person who asks the question after.
the problem isnt just that you countered a question with a question, its the fact that the question you asked of me (or ratchet, i cant remember) had nothing to do with the argument you asked for proof that spyro is coming back but we never said he was, all we said that there is insufficient evidence to say that he never will
as i said before, its something that happens whenever atheists and theists have an arguement, an atheist will say you cant prove god exists, and the theist will say "well you cant prove he doesnt" the problem with that is
a) evidence is used to prove a point, and lack of evidence is used to disprove a point (at least temporarily)
b) the atheist did not necessarily say god doesnt exist, an atheist might instead be arguing that its silly to believe something exists without evidence for it
so its not just the way you countered a question with a question, its the fact that the question you used to do so, didnt refer to the arguements we had been making, it was effectively putting words in our mouth
Quote:
I already said why I like the new Spyro better. Apparently, you didn't read any of my arguments.
just because you previously stated a reason for something doesnt mean that in the future you can just state the opinion and expect everyone to know how you feel that way, also the reasoning that you should have posted is the evidence you have that old spyro isnt coming back, thats what was asked of you and the way you responded made it seem that your only evidence for your point was the lack of evidence for the polar opposite
It seems that you failed to account for ratchet's behavior when he asked for "proof". And I'm the one that's immature because I asked for "proof"
if ratchet asked for proof that old spyro will not come back, its because at that point it was something either you or Guest1 had said but not given a reason for
in other words you probably said
spyro is not coming back
rather than
theres almost no possibility that spyro is coming back because of [whatever]
when you asked for proof that he is coming back, there was no relevance, what we had said was not that spyro will come back, but that we'd be happy if he did, if you wanted to argue a point with us then argue the points we've put forward such as "why we believe that old spyro is better" or "why we dislike the new spyro"
basically we said we'd like it if old spyro came back, Guest1 said it wasnt, we asked why, and instead of answering that with the evidence you have, you returned with another question which had nothing to do with our actual argument
Uh, using a question to counter another question is a common counter-argument. So from what you're saying, the person that asks the question first is more right than the person who asks the question after.
I already said why I like the new Spyro better. Apparently, you didn't read any of my arguments.
Joined: 28 May 2008 Posts: 785 Location: Merry Ol' Land of Oz
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 4:10 am Title: RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:
A Guy wrote:
It seems that you failed to account for ratchet's behavior when he asked for "proof". And I'm the one that's immature because I asked for "proof"
if ratchet asked for proof that old spyro will not come back, its because at that point it was something either you or Guest1 had said but not given a reason for
in other words you probably said
spyro is not coming back
rather than
theres almost no possibility that spyro is coming back because of [whatever]
when you asked for proof that he is coming back, there was no relevance, what we had said was not that spyro will come back, but that we'd be happy if he did, if you wanted to argue a point with us then argue the points we've put forward such as "why we believe that old spyro is better" or "why we dislike the new spyro"
basically we said we'd like it if old spyro came back, Guest1 said it wasnt, we asked why, and instead of answering that with the evidence you have, you returned with another question which had nothing to do with our actual argument
Joined: 03 Mar 2008 Posts: 5704 Location: New York City
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:52 am Title: RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:
Fletch_Talon wrote:
A Guy wrote:
Sarcasm:Wow, what a genius point you made.
Not sarcasm:You fail to see the point. You are an idiot.
"lets start an online freak show, see Guest1 the self proclaimed 16 yr old with the mental capacity of..."
that can be referred to as sarcasm, since i didnt actually mean what was being said, it was simply a way of emphasising my point, now that i think of it, i suppose the better word would be exaggeration
as for when i simply outright said that Guest1 was acting immature and ignorant, ive stated my reasoning for that, in my belief it was true and i felt the need to let Guest1 know what i thought of his behaviour, and later on what i thought of yours, yes its insulting, but it was said to tell Guest1 to stop, not as an immature insult because i didnt like what he was saying (it was how he was saying it that was the problem)
It seems that you failed to account for ratchet's behavior when he asked for "proof". And I'm the one that's immature because I asked for "proof"
Quote:
Quote:
While what Guest1 said might not have been the most mature thing to say, I never saw where you "requested" to call us idiots. Insulting me because of something someone else did? Why? Because they share the same opinion as me?
You did not actually call me an idiot? You said something along the lines of "Guest1 and A Guy are the most idiotic people..." (I'm still looking for your post. I'll post it when I find it.)
And yes, I have enough points that support the theory that Spyro is not coming back.
1. i believe my words were along the lines of "dear god can i call these 2 idiots yet?"
2. you were included in the above statement because of the quote i posted, "where's the proof that he is coming back?" did not only come across as immature, but it also showed me disrespect because you clearly hadnt read my points, my argument was never that old spyro WILL come back, it is that i would like it if he did
3. the only way you can have irrefutable evidence that old spyro will not come back is if you can see into the future, even if the creators of tLoS say they dont want to do it, they arent always necessarily going to be in charge, i mean the original designers of tLoS have been replaced by new ones for the making of DotD, all it would take is for a company to take over who can successfully reproduce the old spyro,
so no, you dont have evidence that he isnt coming back, you have evidence that insomniac will not return, and possibly evidence that the creators of tLoS will not recreate the old spyro style, but you cannot have evidence that he will not come back at all
unless youre doctor who
in which case my girlfriend loves your work
and i reckon youre pretty awesome too
[/quote]
Yes, good point. There is possibly a small possibility that the old Spyro could be making a comeback. However, it's not likely at all. Also, even if it did manage to happen, I wouldn't care-I'd still play.
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Spyro Wallpaper
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
