By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
pokoko said:

Typing all of that does not make what you originally said go away.  "It's normal and instead of criticizing him for the possibility of that happening all accountability should be put on the party that is mature."  You literally said that an 11 year old should not be criticized or held accountable for using slurs or insults.  You can't change what you said. 

  On top of that, you went the "fallacious argument" route when there was nothing fallacious about it.  

And are you serious about trying to make people look ignorant?  Is that something you should be talking about?  How about your first post in this thread?  "Yes people, I povoct, You povoct, He/She/Me povoct, povoct, povocting, povoctology.  Anyways being "povocted" is not an excuse and that question should not even be in this equation."  Mocking a person repeatedly for a spelling mistake then you say, "maybe you should first look at how you deconstruct arguments, and then ask why people respond in kind"?  That's an absolutely amazing example of hypocrisy.  

So maybe you should first look at how you deconstruct arguments, and then ask why people respond in kind. 

So you're really going to make a Spongebob reference joke as if it was some great insult against Mar? Ok .. I think you are trying WAY too hard to prove a point that isn't really going anywhere. 

It doesn't make it go away but I sure as hell clarified what I meant. I can understand that I wrote a lot, however it should be fairly obvious that in the comment you are replying to, I did not deny what I said, and in fact I clarified it. So I don't really get your point ... of course typing all of that doesn't make what I said go away, I literally clarified it further for you. 

"If you want to say that you didn't mean that exactly, that would be fine, but you're trying to act like you didn't say what you said."

Literally one of my first sentences in my respones: " I admit that if you wanted to read that comment as an acceptance of bad online behavior than it is fairly bad. I should have explained that while I believe that behavior to be "normal" it isn't "good" either (although I already over-explain myself on this site as is)."

What do you think "I should have explained .." means? It means exactly what you state would be acceptable: that the way it was interpreted was not what I meant, at all.

Your whole "switch it around on ya!" tactic doesn't work because you don't understand the basic foundation of .... a joke. 

At this point you're being unreasonable. It's clear you don't have an argument. 


Right, right, like the entire world is going to know about a Spongebob reference, yet me adding "lol" to what you said is terrible, even though it fit perfectly with the way you said it.  Looked to me like you were mocking them.  Still looks like that, in fact, even if you're saying it's a joke now.  

There was nothing wrong with my argument.  I responded to what you said.  Then you tried to say it was a fallacious argument, then you clarified.  Don't leave out all the details.