Debating Style

[jn.loudnotes]

I'm a little too personally involved to see this clearly. . .will others please read the war thread and comment here. . .I'll let Bucc have the last word for now.

[alaric]

I voted for "Something Else" to signify my "Whatever" vote. People should debate however they feel. In addition to saying whatever they want, people also have the right to present ideas in whatever form they like. Whether or not one style is more effective at changing the other party's mind or not is irrelevant.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

My word is this Loudnotes.  Doesn't matter.  I don't care if the poll is heavy in my favor, yours, or indiferent.  

Like I said before, if you don't like my style, you are free to not debate with me.  I didn't drag you into the last few at all.  Feel free to engage or not in debate with me, but a silly little poll isn't going to change my style, that's for damn sure.

Question is, did you go back and read it, as I suggested?  Or are you just being petty and ignorant?

Wait, before you answer that.  Wouldn't this come under that "persoan attack" thing you were against?  Fucking hypocrite.

[The Ghost of Bondo]

Bucc, the use of the word hypocrite could be seen as a personal attack.

Calling someone's argument weak could be seen as a personal attack.

Why stop at just saying he doesn't like your style of debating?

Just as you don't see "attacking an argument" as a personal attack when many would say that the way you do that is, so Louds definition of a personal attack could be different than yours.  If he doesn't consider it a personal attack than he is in no way hypocritical to say what he has in this post.

[jn.loudnotes]

For once please stop being so "fucking" judgmental.  Ironic that you call me petty, you call me hypocritical, when you dismiss everything I say entirely out of context.  Here especially, in no way did I slight you.

My honest attempt in this thread is to get an idea of others' opinions on the matter.  I feel like I can't address things you say when they're said in the manner I've gotten sick of - specifically the excessive profanity and line-by-line arrogance.  And yes, it is excessive when it serves no purpose other than to inform the world that you have nothing better to use in your vocabulary.  However, if other people on the forum, whose opinions I respect, felt differently, I would want to know.

Alaric has wisely chosen not to take sides.  But for once, Bucc, you can listen to someone else's judgement - if others will respond here.

[jn.loudnotes]

Also Alaric, that's fine, but I always thought of these forums as more of a sounding board than an honest attempt to change anyone's mind.  Buccaneer's style lately has made it impossible for me and others to adequately debate - it interrupts the flow and makes response nigh impossible.  Which shouldn't really be the point.

Maybe I just haven't been in school long enough to understand. . .

[tasty]

I agree, but I'm not one for censoring people. Obviously you have requested that he use some other style and he has flatly refused. Only thing I'd tell Bucc is to stop saying that someone must not have understood his point just because they disagreed with it. That type of arrogance is what galls me sometimes.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Why stop at just saying he doesn't like your style of debating?

Why should I?  Have you or him just stopped at saying it?  I think not.

Like I said before, if neither of you can stand to have your argument criticized without calling it a personal attack, then you are both in for a world of personal attacks in your lives.  If you can't take criticism, stay out of debate.  

Just as you don't see "attacking an argument" as a personal attack when many would say that the way you do that is, so Louds definition of a personal attack could be different than yours.  If he doesn't consider it a personal attack than he is in no way hypocritical to say what he has in this post.

Funny, but Loudnotes has "attacked" the style of debate I use.  By his posts in earlier threads, that would constitute a personal attack.  If he feels this way, he's a hypocrite for doing it himself.  

Personally, like I said, I don't care.  Especially if he's too lazy to go back and look at this issue when it was covered before, or give me any non personal argument as to why.  Same goes for you and your judgment of it.  Like you've said countless times.  "Who are you to judge?"

Buccaneer's style lately has made it impossible for me and others to adequately debate - it interrupts the flow and makes response nigh impossible.  Which shouldn't really be the point.

It's not my fault, nor responsibility that you don't seem to have the mental faculties to adequately debate based upon my posts.   There are so many people that have never had any problem at all.  

Have you considered that maybe, what you are finding impossible, is supporting a decision that you really haven't thought through all the way?  That you are maybe wrong about?  Have you actually considered that?  I doubt it.

And now you are saying that it's the POINT of my arguments to make it impossible to respond to.  What pile of bullshit is that?

For once please stop being so "fucking" judgmental.  Ironic that you call me petty, you call me hypocritical, when you dismiss everything I say entirely out of context.  Here especially, in no way did I slight you.

Bullshit.  You are being "so fucking judgmental.  Look there, just above.  You are saying that the point of my style is to make it impossible for you to respond.  That's a fucking judgment.  

And I'm not the one that dismisses anything off hand.  I always give my reasons for dismissing it, unlike those that truly dismiss what is said, but ignoring it.  Have you actually answered many of the questions I've asked you?  And this isn't dismissal, it's completely not agreeing with you.  There's a difference.  

So you say that you haven't slighted me?  Isn't that for me to judge?  I say attacking your arguments isn't slighting you, but you get to judge that.  Why is it that only you are the judge here?  One way or the other.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

My honest attempt in this thread is to get an idea of others' opinions on the matter.  I feel like I can't address things you say when they're said in the manner I've gotten sick of - specifically the excessive profanity and line-by-line arrogance.  And yes, it is excessive when it serves no purpose other than to inform the world that you have nothing better to use in your vocabulary.  However, if other people on the forum, whose opinions I respect, felt differently, I would want to know.

Excessive profanity, so sorry to hurt your delicate feelings lad.  Thanks for another "judgment" about my use of profanity being excessive.  Line by line arrogance.  But it's not arrogant for a 15 year old boy to tell a 30 year old man his debate style is wrong or inappropriate?  You think you lack arrogance Loudnotes?

But let's get to the heart of the point, shall we?  You are sick of my style.  So what?  Why in the world should I change my style for you?  Have you told me why it's not a valid style?  (better not, because I've already given evidence and can supply text books more on it).  Is there a reason that your want for me to change my style is more important then my own preference for it?  What gives you the right to judge my style in the first place?

Now, before you dismiss this on the grounds that you are looking for others opinions, note that in the poll, and in previous posts, you've asked and said that I should change my style.  So I think I deserve an answer to those questions, as a start.

once, Bucc, you can listen to someone else's judgement - if others will respond here.

I've listened to other people opinions so many times Loudnotes, I find that statement a slight you asshole.  You fucking think that talking out of the side of your mouth isn't a slight?  

I listen to opinions when they have something behind them Loudnotes.  Plain and simple.  As I've pointed out, and you seem to have dismissed, Abe changed my mind on one topic not too long ago.  And, as pointed out, he did it through a strong, logical argument.  I guess that may be asking too much of you (yes, there's another slight back for ya).

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Only thing I'd tell Bucc is to stop saying that someone must not have understood his point just because they disagreed with it.

And I'd respond that A) if you didn't understand my post it's probably my fault in the way I put it.  and B) I say that when the response to my post reflects it in a different light then the one I meant.  

I'd also add that everyone here has a high level of arrogance in their writing.  Tasty, Loudnotes, Bondo and myself all included.

[jn.loudnotes]

Obviously we both still see very differently on this.  As a 30-year old man, I'm not really sure what drives you to debate with a 15 year old anyway.  But you seem to be very fixated on that - and whenever I or others contradict you, it becomes a fixation that you must "win".  This first started when I noticed that all you ever seemed to do in your arguments was attack Bondo.  I never accused you of attacking me, until then you started taking what I was saying about Bondo and rooting out every sentence with a slight flaw.  

If that's your style, fine.  However, as you may have noticed, no one on this board has quite the mental acrility necessary to respond adequately.  At least, if that's how you view it.  Bucc, I resent that we are constantly on the defensive in discussing things with you.  It doesn't seem wrong of me to suggest that you could refrain from attacking points once in a while.  Fine if it's necessary - but when was the last time you posted something purely original - not a vitriolic response to someone else?  You want reasons why you should change it?  How about your context?  How about the people you're debating with, and the goal of the debate?  So yes, you could change your style to be a little more accomodating to the people you're trying to talk with.  Maybe we're just too stupid Bucc, but it doesn't really matter.

As I said before, this age difference thing seems to have given you a certain feeling of moral and/or intellectual superiority.  If so, why are you here?  If you're so much smarter than we, why waste your time?  

And I started this thread not with the intention of our carrying on debate.  I want to hear other people's opinions, because all I hear from you is why I'm wrong.

And as for personal attacks - I also never said that attacking a point is a personal attack.  When you attack it in a way such as, "You're fucking wrong, asshole" I consider that a personal attack.  And if that's judgemental, too bad.  You know I am a moderator here and I don't particularly care to read through that crap.  So deal with it.

I did look at back at where it was covered - you assume too much.  But this is personal for me.  Your postings are making debate less engaging for me, personally.  I've tried to explain why, I never made a huge issue out of it at first except to let you know it was a problem.  However, you've intensified it if anything, as though you resent being criticized.  Maybe I can put it in a way that would be more appealing for you:

Buccaneer, some of us would appreciate some help in comprehending your postings.  Please back off on your attacking details a little bit.

Anyway, this is the kind of long drawn out response that is required to respond to your quotes.  Maybe you enjoy these kinds of things, but I don't.  Bondo doesn't.  I don't get the impression that anyone here does.  

Now, what will follow?  You'll quote things I just said, interpret them someway other than what I intended (of course, or else we'd be in agreement) and then say why that interpretation is wrong.  And if I were to continue playing the game, I would essentially need to restate this entire posting until some blessed soul led the debate off topic.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Obviously we both still see very differently on this.  As a 30-year old man, I'm not really sure what drives you to debate with a 15 year old anyway.  

Does it matter?  Or are you just trying to slight me again?  You don't think your age should matter in anything you write here, but you are now placing a judgement on me debating with you based on your age.  That make sense to you?  Should I treat you like a 15 year old and ignore things based on that, or should I ignore your age and argue based on what you say?  If I should ignore you age and look at your message, as you've said before, then your statement about not being sure what drives me is kinda stupid, no?

I never accused you of attacking me, until then you started taking what I was saying about Bondo and rooting out every sentence with a slight flaw.  

And if the flaws are there, what's wrong with it?  Flaws in every sentence equals an overall flaw in the whole thing, doesn't it?

If that's your style, fine.  However, as you may have noticed, no one on this board has quite the mental acrility necessary to respond adequately.  

Quite wrong there.  I've found quite a few people on this board with the mental capacity to both respond well and make solid arguments.  Bondo just isn't one of them.  You don't seem to be either.  But don't sell everyone else short.  There are plenty of others that seem to be able to handle it.

Bucc, I resent that we are constantly on the defensive in discussing things with you.  It doesn't seem wrong of me to suggest that you could refrain from attacking points once in a while.  

You are right, there is nothing wrong with you suggesting it.  But you went way past that a long time ago.  You've demanded it.  You have every right to suggest it, and I have every right to not heed your suggestion, no?  

but when was the last time you posted something purely original - not a vitriolic response to someone else?

I do both, in the same post Loud, as is my style.  If you look into it, I start with what I see as something wrong, I expound on why it's wrong, then follow with what I think is right, with some logic behind it.  I give ideas in there.  Look at one of the previous war threads, where I draw the parallels between Iraq now and 1935 Germany.  Look at the abortion thread where I bring forth the ideas that you can't logically draw the line between conception and birth, that the line should be at one end or the other.  Or that we grant more civil rights to one group over another?  No, none of those are original arguments (for this board, because It would be wrong to say that they weren't influenced by others, not of this board).  

So, my ideas are there for others to take issue with Loudnotes.  So is the logic I use.  All you have to do is look.

You want reasons why you should change it?  How about your context?  How about the people you're debating with, and the goal of the debate?  So yes, you could change your style to be a little more accomodating to the people you're trying to talk with.  Maybe we're just too stupid Bucc, but it doesn't really matter.

How about my context?  Sure, asking that question is enlightening.  Oh, that was sarcastic if you didn't notice.

As for accamodating the people I'm debating with, why?  Do I ask you to change your style?  Do I tell you that you look idiotic using such a heavy vocabulary in public forum and you shouldn't do it because it bothers me?  No, and other then giving my opinion, I have no grounds to demand it, that's for damn sure.  

Maybe you (don't include others) are too stupid for it Loudnotes.  And if so, then it's not meant for you anyway.  If you are too stupid to understand it, then you are too stupid to worry about your opinion anyway.  Right?

[|MP|Buccaneer]

As I said before, this age difference thing seems to have given you a certain feeling of moral and/or intellectual superiority.  If so, why are you here?  If you're so much smarter than we, why waste your time?  

Actually, if anything gives me the feeling of intellectual superiority, it's the stupidity of some of your posts.  The utter lack of logic that sometimes amazes one.

But I'll just turn that one around.  If you hate the way I debate so much, why not just ignore it, or go somewhere else?

I did look at back at where it was covered - you assume too much.  

My bad, you looked back, and didn't respond to my points, but just dismissed them out of hand without any acknowledgment.  I see.  Thank you for clearing up my mistake.  So instead of thinking you are too lazy to go back and read them, I should think you are just too arrogant to address them, as I asked before.

You know I am a moderator here and I don't particularly care to read through that crap.  So deal with it.

Is that a threat?  Is it?  I don't respond well to threats, so let me know.  

As for you not wanting to read through them, well, that's your responsibility in being a moderator.  Isn't it?  Don't like it, don't be a moderator.  That's simple, isn't it?  But until I see every name calling of me by Bondo deleted (oh, and there are so many) I don't expect to see any of mine deleted either.  Apply that moderation equally or not at all.

Buccaneer, some of us would appreciate some help in comprehending your postings.  Please back off on your attacking details a little bit.

What does one have to do with the other?

Anyway, this is the kind of long drawn out response that is required to respond to your quotes.  

Actually, so many of my questions went unanswered.  Why is your judgement better?  How have you not been judgmental or slighting me?  I've pointed out where I think you are.  What about your arrogance?  Are you not at least as arrogant as me?  If not, why do you think not?  There were even more questions up there and in the war thread, all "dismissed" with no response.  

Now, what will follow?  You'll quote things I just said, interpret them someway other than what I intended (of course, or else we'd be in agreement) and then say why that interpretation is wrong.  And if I were to continue playing the game, I would essentially need to restate this entire posting until some blessed soul led the debate off topic.

What have I interpreted that was different then what you intended?  Correct me, please.  

LOL, now there's some arrogance for you.  If I interpret them the way you meant them, I'd have to agree.  You are full of yourself, aren't you Loudnotes?  Instead of just ignoring what I question, and restating your position, how about answering some of my questions, I usually post many of them?

[tasty]

Actually, if anything gives me the feeling of intellectual superiority, it's the stupidity of some of your posts.  The utter lack of logic that sometimes amazes one.

I think loudnotes is a pretty smart and eloquent guy, especially for someone that's only 15. I don't think bondo is dumb either. Just wanted to to bring some positive energy to this thread  

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Tasty, I don't think either of them is really dumb either.  Doesn't mean I have to agree with them or their posts.  Just like my not agreeing doesn't make them stupid.

[jn.loudnotes]

Well, you're right in my inability to communicate in at least one sense, that I'm not making myself clear to you.

When I ignore things you say, it's because of the sheer volume of them.  I'll do this once - I'll quote everything you just said that I would have interpreted differently.  I don't have the resources - time or intelligence - to do this all the time.  So in the interest of better debate, I hope we could stop being so finicky.

Does it matter?  Or are you just trying to slight me again?  You don't think your age should matter in anything you write here, but you are now placing a judgement on me debating with you based on your age.  That make sense to you?  Should I treat you like a 15 year old and ignore things based on that, or should I ignore your age and argue based on what you say?  If I should ignore you age and look at your message, as you've said before, then your statement about not being sure what drives me is kinda stupid, no?

I think you should ignore age, yes.  But since you brought it up, I have to wonder why such wisdom would deign to speak with such immaturity.  You were the one who suggested my age played a role in my arguments.  If you think it does, it's your perogative not to respect my opinions - but don't tell me I'm wrong because I'm younger than you.

And if the flaws are there, what's wrong with it?  Flaws in every sentence equals an overall flaw in the whole thing, doesn't it?

There aren't flaws in every sentence Bucc.  A few of them, perhaps even most, do not stand well on their own, but I have argued that they are perfectly sound within the context of a whole argument.  Likewise, I'm trying to show you right now that anything you say can be similarly deconstructed.

Quite wrong there.  I've found quite a few people on this board with the mental capacity to both respond well and make solid arguments.  Bondo just isn't one of them.  You don't seem to be either.  But don't sell everyone else short.  There are plenty of others that seem to be able to handle it.

Again this issue of intelligence.  You're responding to my sarcasm with sarcasm.  Seriously, what purpose does this serve?  And note that I have never once commented on your abilities as a person or intellectual - even in jest, yet you seem to jump at the opportunity to detract from me.

You are right, there is nothing wrong with you suggesting it.  But you went way past that a long time ago.  You've demanded it.  You have every right to suggest it, and I have every right to not heed your suggestion, no?

Of course you don't have to.  But don't get upset at people for ignoring parts of your posts when your posts are, as I've described, too much to respond to.  

So, my ideas are there for others to take issue with Loudnotes.  So is the logic I use.  All you have to do is look.

Yes they are there, and visible.  However, since you only present your ideas in criticism of anothers', it provokes a response to the criticism, not to the idea.  Which is a clever way to avoid being called on your own ideas, am I wrong?

[jn.loudnotes]

How about my context?  Sure, asking that question is enlightening.  Oh, that was sarcastic if you didn't notice.

As for accamodating the people I'm debating with, why?  Do I ask you to change your style?  Do I tell you that you look idiotic using such a heavy vocabulary in public forum and you shouldn't do it because it bothers me?  No, and other then giving my opinion, I have no grounds to demand it, that's for damn sure.

Yes, I notice sarcasm.  Do you?  And yes, context is important, and I'll be happy to change my style if it helps other people to read.  The only exception is that responses like these - your style that I'm addressing at the moment - take forever.  It's ridiculous.  And you have plenty of grounds.  If you want to debate with me, and the feeling is mutual, why shouldn't I accomodate you to some extent?  Notice I am still debating with you.  But it's overdone and wastes everyone's time.  By the way, does my vocabulary bother you?  These things are easily modified.  I wouldn't talk the same way to a kindergarten class as I would to a university professor.  Right now I don't think about what syntax I use - it's a general audience so I'll write whatever comes to mind.  But just let me know if something needs changing.  Have I not given you a decent reason for why you might try a different style?  I'm trying yours - give mine a shot.

Maybe you (don't include others) are too stupid for it Loudnotes.  And if so, then it's not meant for you anyway.  If you are too stupid to understand it, then you are too stupid to worry about your opinion anyway.  Right?

Why shouldn't I include others?  We're all in the same boat. . .others have complained too.  None of us are stupid - if you want to play on the sarcasm that's fine, but we are reasonably intelligent people who have difficulty responding to you.  Don't be so arrogant as to assume that it's only due to the quality of your statements.  We've agreed on a lot in the past - many of those are good statements.  However, I'm not saying my method is any better than yours, only that yours isn't working for this community.  At least not for me, Bondo, and tasty.  That's why I wanted some more opinion in this thread.

Notice, by the way, that I didn't vote.

[jn.loudnotes]

Actually, if anything gives me the feeling of intellectual superiority, it's the stupidity of some of your posts.  The utter lack of logic that sometimes amazes one.

But I'll just turn that one around.  If you hate the way I debate so much, why not just ignore it, or go somewhere else?

That would be an example of a personal attack.  Have I ever said anything remotely close to that?  What I'm saying is that sometimes I am forced to ignore half the things you say, which is frustrating when parts of them attack me directly.  But I would really rather not.  I never had anything against debating with or against you.

My bad, you looked back, and didn't respond to my points, but just dismissed them out of hand without any acknowledgment.  I see.  Thank you for clearing up my mistake.  So instead of thinking you are too lazy to go back and read them, I should think you are just too arrogant to address them, as I asked before.

Not arrogant Bucc, just incapable.  Part of that has to do with not having time to respond to all this.  I'm on spring break right now, so I've got a chance to try out your quotation style.  It's very effective I'm sure - but it takes forever.  I want to discuss the big ideas, not analyze our personal flaws.  I have them, I know it, and so does everyone else.  Even you.  It's not arrogant to fail to respond to everything - it's arrogant to assume that everyone is going to respond to everything you say.

[jn.loudnotes]

You know I am a moderator here and I don't particularly care to read through that crap.  So deal with it.

Is that a threat?  Is it?  I don't respond well to threats, so let me know.

As for you not wanting to read through them, well, that's your responsibility in being a moderator.  Isn't it?  Don't like it, don't be a moderator.  That's simple, isn't it?  But until I see every name calling of me by Bondo deleted (oh, and there are so many) I don't expect to see any of mine deleted either.  Apply that moderation equally or not at all.

Normally I would have just ignored this.  Instead, I get to write a paragraph about how you took me out of context.  I was writing about profanity, especially in the context of a personal attack.  So no, it's not a threat, I'm not going to delete anything, I never even mentioned if you were the only one.  I merely said that since I have some responsibility over this message board, whatever that's worth, that it shouldn't be filled with profanity and personal attacks.  I showed you an example of one, and you haven't denied it.  So, we shouldn't have to read any more of that on this board, not I or anyone else.  Bondo should of course live up to the same standards.  But since you directed it at me, it made a slightly greater impression.  So yes, if you keep doing it, it will be edited, or deleted, or something.  Just stop.  Pretty simple isn't it?  

Actually, so many of my questions went unanswered.  Why is your judgement better?  How have you not been judgmental or slighting me?  I've pointed out where I think you are.  What about your arrogance?  Are you not at least as arrogant as me?  If not, why do you think not?  There were even more questions up there and in the war thread, all "dismissed" with no response.

Bucc, this is the kind of response necessary to address every one of your posts.  3-4 full postings worth of material.  If there's something I haven't addresssed, I'm not really sure how that's possible.  Do you really think we should all have to do this every time anyone says anything?  The issue of your style is that it imposes itself upon others.  

What have I interpreted that was different then what you intended?  Correct me, please.  

LOL, now there's some arrogance for you.  If I interpret them the way you meant them, I'd have to agree.  You are full of yourself, aren't you Loudnotes?  Instead of just ignoring what I question, and restating your position, how about answering some of my questions, I usually post many of them?

Nope, I've shown you several places here you misinterpreted me.  It's possible to disagree with things I've said - I'm not so arrogant as to believe that's not the case.  But don't disagree with something other than what I meant.  That's pointless.


Well there you have it.  A Buccaneer posting in response to a Buccaneer posting.  What's next, an 8-page response to this 4-page one?  It can't keep building up forever.

[jn.loudnotes]

By the way, thanks tasty.  I think we're all fucking genuises and I don't see why we can't all get along. . .

Anyway, those postings took me 45 minutes to write.  I don't want to take 45 minutes to respond to debate every day - sometimes several times a day.  Is that unreasonable?