Hatemail
dwmartin/Triumviron
>>Second (appropriate) reply from Triumviron.
This guy is so full of hatred
>>that it is disturbing... You have to
scan down through over half the message
>>before he gets back on topic (the debate).
I also note a gross
>>misunderstanding of several logical fallacies.
He refused to use the staff
>>address, then claims that he was compliant.
It is apparent that he has no
>>intentions of trying to argue a valid point
- he is here simply to be
>>arrogant. Too bad that debates aren't
won by being irritating. They are won
>>by using valid evidence and logic, and following
the scientific method.
Nice ad hominem. You failed to refute even
a word of what I said but instead
resorted to name calling. How very mature
of you. I never refused to comply
with the staff address, I already posted the
truth. I asked why use the staff
address. Asking why is NOT the same as
refusing to comply. You're damn right
I'm angry. First you question my integrity
and then go lie about what I did and
did not say. You start by implying that
I sent some kind of inappropriate
message or messages in between the first and
second posts of mine on the site.
I have the records of every message sent and
the only one sent prior to this and
after the first one of mine that went up on your
site was the one that you
deemed the second appropriate one. It was
the ONLY second one. Then you go on
to lie once again about my comments in reard
to the staff email address. The
exact quote was "Also, why should I direct them
towards the staff? I am not
accepting a challenge from the staff, I accepted
it from you." Tell me where in
that sentence, the only commentary on my part
that took place on the topic of
what address to use, I refused to use the address.
I challenged you to do that
last time and you still haven't. Either
show everybody where I refused to use
the address or shut up and conceed the point.
You are being even more dishonest by claiming
that I took the topic off track.
Anybody with the functioning neuron count of
a deceased squirrel can tell that
every last byte of what I posted was in direct
responce to you and the crap you
put up. I will also notice that you have
attempted to cover up the part about
how you claimed that I said you were trying to
back out by not responding to it
and not making any note of the fact that you
were wrong and that I never said
any such thing.
What logicla fallacies did I "grossly misnderstand?"
I mentioned three. One
was the ad hominem. You
keep comparing me to Adarx who you call an imbecile.
You made a personal attack against me and none
of the content of what I posted.
My description of the fallacy was right
on the money. Secondly I called you on
a strawman. This was because you blatantly
misquoted me in an attempt to
present a deeply distorted wersion of what I
said to discredit me (see all the
bull crap about me refusing to use the staff
address.) You also refused to
respond to any of the questions I posed to you.
Finally, I called you on a Red
Herring. This was when you went off on
how to win debates during a conversation
on proper netiquette in relation to your email
strawman. The two were
completely unrelated.
If you think that you can simply put up whatever
crap about me that you want on
your site and then try to claim that I am the
one taking it off topic by
defending myself you are sadly mistaken.
But I suppose you will ignore this one
too, make another worthless snide remark and
act like I am the one who is
draging this thing through the mud.
I want you to admit that I did not EVER refuse
to use the staff address and I
also want you to admit that I NEVER accused you
of trying to back out of the
debate. Further I want the truth about
how many messages put up and I want a
stop to your damned slander.
Now on to the actual debate and not the crap you keep putting on your site.
Last time I checked it was the challenged who
got choice of weapons (evidence),
and, if I recall, you challenged me.
http://www.romanceeverafter.com/the_truth_about_duels.htm
I do find it strange that
you were willing to debate Babylon 5 Wars with Adarx
but not with me.
In any event, if I do not
get to use Babylon 5 Wars then the Burden of proof is
on you since I will simply be denying your positive
arguement (planetary
razings) rather than proposing anything.
You have made the first, last, and
only positive claim and I expect you to prove
it.
I will NOT accept any text size limitations until
I determine exactly how much
space I will need to cover every point on your
site relevant to the firepower of
the Vorlon Planet Killer.
I said calculations are not relevant because I
do not need to determine how much
energy they put out, only whether it is sufficient
to shatter a planet. I am
only here to refute the evidence you put up.
I don't have to defend my
position, you do.