This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Did i really deserve to get guild kick?
Return to board index
Post by
justinc
Seriously? This has gotten to 12 pages?
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
FFS, lolollo, that's exactly what I said. If the guild "cannot" make a rule, then no offense has been committed.
You need to stop arguing in circles.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
But they CAN make a rule. Who said they cannot? Someone said they cannot REASONABLY make a rule like that, but no one said they cannot.
You're
equivocating
with
can
.
You really need to get a better grip on critical thinking.
Post by
Murrdurr
The horse is dead people, stop beating it.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
But they CAN make a rule. Who said they cannot? Someone said they cannot REASONABLY make a rule like that, but no one said they cannot.
You're
equivocating
with
can
.
You really need to get a better grip on critical thinking./rolleyes
So you're saying "I'm arguing whether OP commited an offense" is the same thing as saying "I'm arguing whether OP broke an unreasonable rule"?
There you go again making stuff up. When did I ever say the latter?
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
On offense is a breach of moral or social code.
The question is, if the rule was illegitamate, was he still required to follow it by some social (morality doesn't factor in) code, or not? i.e. did he still commit an offense? And then, that aside, whether the rule itself was actually illegitimate.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
No, an offense is breaking a rule.
MW: a breach of a moral or social code
Dictionary.com: a violation or breaking of a social or moral rule
There...I've quoted two dictionaries backing up my use of the word offense. Take your argument up with them, not me.
he still commited an offense whether the rule was justified or not.
Says, you. And says me. I'm arguing against the opposite position. It's good to know you're not in that camp. So move along.
cannot
is not
interchangeable with cannot unreasonably either therefore it is NOT equivocating.. cannot does not have multiple definitions... misusing fallacies is a fallacy too fyi
Yes, it does have multiple meanings. You seem to need to look more stuff up in the dictionary. I already told you several times what I mean by
can
. You keep ignoring that and interpreting it differently.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Yeah, ignore context and just quote one of 9 definitions. What are we discussing in this thread? Guild rules.
Definition #2:
2. a transgression of the law;
So much for your critical thinking skills.
You're the one attacking my use of it.
I never said it can't be used any other way. I told you
how I am using it
, and I just give two sources confirming that my use of it is correct.
I'm
the one who used the term, so
I'm
the one that chose to use it a certain way.
So where are the multiple meanings?
At this point I know you're just doing this on purpose.
Obviously it's the
can
part of the word that has the multiple meanings, not the
not
. And you know that.
Anyways, you obviously refuse interpret my argument in any other way than what you want it to be, so I'm not going to bother with you any more. My points still stand against Braevia and Davidson if they want to answer them.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
I don't blame you for backing out. This debate is pretty one-sided.
Obviously. You're arguing against something that doesn't exist.
How more one-sided can you get?
If you want to argue
my
premises, not your interpretation of them, I'm perfectly fine with that.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
488155
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Like some imaginary person saying he didn't break a rule i.e. commit an offense?
Exactly. Because I sure never said those two were the same thing. So either it's a figmet of your imagination or you're mistaking me for someone else, or you've got multiple personalities. Not sure which.
So you're saying the rules ARE reasonable?
I have said in the thread, yes. But that's something completely irrelevant to the point I've been making in the last 7-8 pages though.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.