This thread is locked
PLEASE NOTE: This thread has been locked by the moderators. You cannot reply to it.
And now you're throwing dirt at me. I believe that's what you called an Ad Hominem fallacy.
You're real good at discussing.
You're real good at discussing.
"You can't have your privacy violated if you don't know your privacy is violated." - Mike Rogers, U.S. Representative for Michigan's 8th congressional district, 2013
I.e: Mike Rogers doesn't think it's rape unless the victim knows (s)he has been raped. Sounds legit.
I.e: Mike Rogers doesn't think it's rape unless the victim knows (s)he has been raped. Sounds legit.
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
It is not an ad hominem fallacy. An ad hominem fallacy is something along the lines of "Your opinion is invalid because YOU are stupid". If someone says "You are stupid" then it wouldn't be a fallacy, it would just be an insult. The opposite, "Your opinion is valid because YOU are a cop/teacher/whatever" is a fallacy called appeal to authority.
Either way, I'm not throwing dirt at you, I'm stating what the discussion was about. It was about you saying that my opinion was invalid unless I had played both games. And that's a logical fallacy, and a logical fallacy is nothing but an inability to formulate a logical argument, and that's what I was discussing, how I can judge a game without playing it and the rather short amount of time I spent playing each game is irrelevant.
Either way, I'm not throwing dirt at you, I'm stating what the discussion was about. It was about you saying that my opinion was invalid unless I had played both games. And that's a logical fallacy, and a logical fallacy is nothing but an inability to formulate a logical argument, and that's what I was discussing, how I can judge a game without playing it and the rather short amount of time I spent playing each game is irrelevant.
My bad, you just insulted me. That's much better..
Of course you can judge a game in by just playing a little and reading up on it. But your attitude doesn't quite make me want to discuss it with you.
You're favoring one game a lot and you're acting like the other one is bad,ignoring or insulting anyone who disagrees with you with big comments about the mistakes in their comments.
I hope it's clear why I don't want to discuss this with you.
Edited; you're right about 2 things (reflected above).
Of course you can judge a game in by just playing a little and reading up on it. But your attitude doesn't quite make me want to discuss it with you.
You're favoring one game a lot and you're acting like the other one is bad,
I hope it's clear why I don't want to discuss this with you.
Edited; you're right about 2 things (reflected above).
"every now and again you come across a game that has so little emotional connection to who you are that you end up standing there, gazing at the screen and saying "I'm just pressing buttons and my life has no meaning,"" - Colin Campbell
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
No.. I never insulted you. If anyone insulted you in this thread it was you. You made a logical fallacy and I pointed it out, there were no insults involved.
I'm not favouring one game, I briefly said what's good about each game and in what aspects of the game does GW2 win over Tera.
I never ignored anyone who disagreed with me, I only asked for evidence. Lugi disagreed but he didn't know anything about the games to form a coherent argument. Darcurse said some stuff about the games without really knowing anything about them either and didn't form a coherent argument either. I still replied to Darcurse's first post but then he just said "I'm right and you're wrong even if I don't anything about the games". You never made any argument regarding the games and only said that my opinion is invalid because I haven't played enough of each game. So, who is ignoring comments? Isn't it you? I'm pretty sure you've got mixed up.
Also, I never insulted anyone who disagreed with me "with big comments" or without. The only person I replied to with big comments is you because you didn't get it the first time. I never insulted anyone for mistakes in their comments, I pointed out your logical fallacy because it renders your whole argument meaningless, that's what logical fallacies are. It's not a grammar mistake or giving a bad example, it's still easy to understand an argument even with those kinds of flaws, but when a logical fallacy is present then it means that the argument itself is unreasonable.
And will you please stop insulting me and putting words in my mouth?
I'm not favouring one game, I briefly said what's good about each game and in what aspects of the game does GW2 win over Tera.
I never ignored anyone who disagreed with me, I only asked for evidence. Lugi disagreed but he didn't know anything about the games to form a coherent argument. Darcurse said some stuff about the games without really knowing anything about them either and didn't form a coherent argument either. I still replied to Darcurse's first post but then he just said "I'm right and you're wrong even if I don't anything about the games". You never made any argument regarding the games and only said that my opinion is invalid because I haven't played enough of each game. So, who is ignoring comments? Isn't it you? I'm pretty sure you've got mixed up.
Also, I never insulted anyone who disagreed with me "with big comments" or without. The only person I replied to with big comments is you because you didn't get it the first time. I never insulted anyone for mistakes in their comments, I pointed out your logical fallacy because it renders your whole argument meaningless, that's what logical fallacies are. It's not a grammar mistake or giving a bad example, it's still easy to understand an argument even with those kinds of flaws, but when a logical fallacy is present then it means that the argument itself is unreasonable.
And will you please stop insulting me and putting words in my mouth?
<Member>