Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 3551 to 3555 (21st to 25th August 2017)
Emperor Norton:
--- Quote from: Shjade on 26 Aug 2017, 16:24 ---If it doesn't resemble their argument, why would they assume I was talking about them? :?
--- End quote ---
Because almost no one, at least no one who did more than drop a 2 sentence post and then leave, actually had an opinion that sounded anything like what you typed. The statement you made was a straight straw man.
But sure let's play "Let me make a swipe at people and state their opinion in a way that makes them look ridiculous and then pretend that isn't what I did."
Gyrre:
I'm starting to think that some folks enjoy beating the dead horse. Especially those that like riding their high horse.
Can we just leave the horse to rot in peace?
Emperor Norton:
So stating a strawman is OK, but calling it out is frowned upon? I'm out.
My suggestion though: You want a horse to stay buried, you don't continue to make swipes at one side of the argument.
EDIT: Longer point: The discussion was over, no one was discussing it, everyone seemed to be happy about it. I wasn't the one who brought the argument back up though. My last 2 posts before his straw man was just to say I really like undercooked chocolate chip cookies, and that it is a normal conceit of slice of life fiction for discussions to happen at people's places of work.
Shjade:
I made a joke, not a curse besmirching your family name - or anyone's name in fact. You didn't need to dig up the horse to defend its honor. Chill.
Jesus. The tension level of the QC forum's a lot higher than I remember it.
Emperor Norton:
--- Quote from: Shjade on 26 Aug 2017, 18:44 ---I made a joke, not a curse besmirching your family name - or anyone's name in fact. You didn't need to dig up the horse to defend its honor. Chill.
Jesus. The tension level of the QC forum's a lot higher than I remember it.
--- End quote ---
Once again, you brought the argument back up, not me, by creating a straw man of the opposing side. I'm not seeing how this isn't clearly obvious.
Am I cranky? Hell yes, I'm cranky. I dealt with pages of people misrepresenting what I said to make arguments against things I never said, and then when it is finally dead, over, and finished, someone decides that they need to make another straw man swipe at the side of the argument I was on.
If I'd made a passing comment on how everyone last week was saying May's lack of privilege made it OK for her to be a dick to everyone better off than her (which, by the way, is not an argument anyone who stayed in the conversation for more than one drop in post made), would you blame me for digging up the horse, or the person who responded to point out that I was digging up the horse?
EDIT: You know what, nevermind, I just don't care anymore. I just think it is frustrating that someone can bring a dead argument back up with a strawman, and the bad guy is apparently the person who points it out. Like seriously you don't think this "one of the people who'd previously been so wounded on Winslow's behalf" isn't taking a swipe at people?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version