We’ve already established that you’re willing to lie to win an argument, why do you think I’d listen to aaaanything else you’re going to bring to this?
I never lied, so no, we haven’t established that. All we’ve established is that you will go to enormous lengths to try to discuss something entirely irrelevant. It’s like I never left Reddit.
You absolutely 🎶diiiiiiiiiiiiiid🎶 and you are humiliating yourself here.
…
(Hey so I’m gonna go do something more interesting than listen to you recite the narcissist’s prayer, I’ll get back to your next limp accusation of “perverted debate behavior” or not making a point or w/e in a while mmk? mmk.)
Honestly? When they started trying to make up nonsense to excuse away intentionally misleading people.
I don’t particularly care if someone uses a bad source accidentally, but it does annoy me when someone with a history of using bad sources never ever gets called on it. The source they cite they’ve never read, and they’re trying to claim that “not available to the public without a very selective application that requires a business email, one that they clearly did not pass” is the same thing as “publicly available”. It’s obnoxious.
I was very nice up until that point, but now we’ve reached comment depth and despite admitting that what they did was shitty they’re still trying to spin it like they did nothing wrong. He just used a bad source, right? But he can’t admit that was a mistake. It’s damning behavior, really.
It is rather effective, isn’t it? I mean, anyone can see what I’m doing there. It’s not subtle.
But, weirdly, they still have to respond. I know that was childish; I mean obviously, that was the whole point. Drawing attention to how they backed themselves into an ideological corner and sceded me the bulk of the social power in this… whatever it is. I can say anything and they still have to respond, and as you point out I’ve very effectively demonstrated that concept.
Seriously, if they were arguing in good faith or were really the bigger person or didn’t care or so on, why are they still talking to someone that mocks them with emoji? It’s the lowest form of engagement - ideas so void of originality that they can be represented as a symbol. And yet, apparently still engaging enough for them to continue making nonsense up to defend themselves.
If this were just this argument, they’d lose nothing by walking away. But they insist on dragging it out, and I’m genuinely curious where they’re trying to go with this.
Comment depth edit: Exactly! Wonderful example, thank you Amnesigenic. Emoji are less blatant about it because they can be embedded with text, but they’re equally as valueless a contribution (outside of this specific meta-commentary, obviously)
You’re still… doing this? You lied, dude. You knowingly presented a source to support your claim as being public, when it isn’t, and even better you’d never even seen the data. That’s just lying, there’s no way to whine or insult your way out of it. You, are a liar.
It is available to the public, though. Here’s Arnaud Bertrand talking about it. I’ve seen the data. I am not a liar, you seemed to have an extremely particular definition of publicly available and derailed the conversation on those ground alone. Very strange.
We’ve already established that you’re willing to lie to win an argument, why do you think I’d listen to aaaanything else you’re going to bring to this?
I never lied, so no, we haven’t established that. All we’ve established is that you will go to enormous lengths to try to discuss something entirely irrelevant. It’s like I never left Reddit.
Man, go back to the “debate pervert” thing that was way less embarassing for you than honestly calling someone a redditor.
I never lied, yet you continued to play debate games to try to derail the conversation. None of this is particularly embarrassing for me.
You absolutely 🎶diiiiiiiiiiiiiid🎶 and you are humiliating yourself here.
…
(Hey so I’m gonna go do something more interesting than listen to you recite the narcissist’s prayer, I’ll get back to your next limp accusation of “perverted debate behavior” or not making a point or w/e in a while mmk? mmk.)
(Bye for now!)
Jesus, how did you become so obnoxious?
Honestly? When they started trying to make up nonsense to excuse away intentionally misleading people.
I don’t particularly care if someone uses a bad source accidentally, but it does annoy me when someone with a history of using bad sources never ever gets called on it. The source they cite they’ve never read, and they’re trying to claim that “not available to the public without a very selective application that requires a business email, one that they clearly did not pass” is the same thing as “publicly available”. It’s obnoxious.
I was very nice up until that point, but now we’ve reached comment depth and despite admitting that what they did was shitty they’re still trying to spin it like they did nothing wrong. He just used a bad source, right? But he can’t admit that was a mistake. It’s damning behavior, really.
I mean how did you become a parody of a smug, obnoxious redditer who seems to have learned to talk solely from Joss Weadon movies and anime?
It is rather effective, isn’t it? I mean, anyone can see what I’m doing there. It’s not subtle.
But, weirdly, they still have to respond. I know that was childish; I mean obviously, that was the whole point. Drawing attention to how they backed themselves into an ideological corner and sceded me the bulk of the social power in this… whatever it is. I can say anything and they still have to respond, and as you point out I’ve very effectively demonstrated that concept.
Seriously, if they were arguing in good faith or were really the bigger person or didn’t care or so on, why are they still talking to someone that mocks them with emoji? It’s the lowest form of engagement - ideas so void of originality that they can be represented as a symbol. And yet, apparently still engaging enough for them to continue making nonsense up to defend themselves.
If this were just this argument, they’d lose nothing by walking away. But they insist on dragging it out, and I’m genuinely curious where they’re trying to go with this.
Comment depth edit: Exactly! Wonderful example, thank you Amnesigenic. Emoji are less blatant about it because they can be embedded with text, but they’re equally as valueless a contribution (outside of this specific meta-commentary, obviously)
Nope, didn’t lie. Keep digging deeper, I guess?
You’re still… doing this? You lied, dude. You knowingly presented a source to support your claim as being public, when it isn’t, and even better you’d never even seen the data. That’s just lying, there’s no way to whine or insult your way out of it. You, are a liar.
It is available to the public, though. Here’s Arnaud Bertrand talking about it. I’ve seen the data. I am not a liar, you seemed to have an extremely particular definition of publicly available and derailed the conversation on those ground alone. Very strange.
Dear god, a twitter link? How quaint, musk must be so proud.Do… you ever actually read your sources?
It had to be given to the author of that thread by the lead researcher, it isn’t available to the public.