Dalton wrote:Don't presume to dictate to me how I should do my job.
Take it as a suggestion, given that I can't exactly make you act benevolently. Besides, are you saying that you don't want to be a benevolent despot?
Ah, I see, more lawyering. Do you think this helps your case? Do you believe that trying to claim the Admin is using a logical fallacy will make his ban-power useless? I think you'll find that your tactics here are less than useless, because this isn't where I have to prove that you are a trolling douchebag. That's already been proven in other threads, and based upon the evidence that I've seen, I have rendered judgment. See, this here is where I tell you that you are going to be banned, very soon, because you think you can throw the rules in my face and continue trolling this board.
I was defending myself. You clearly got angry at me for comparing you to a slave owner, and I'm explaining that it wasn't intended to be that. If you want to, ignore the accusation of you using a strawman and focus on my point; that is, that making a claim and stating that it's "self evident" can be used for practically any absurd claim (and no, I'm not claiming that your point is absurd, simply that your evidence has been used to back up absurd claims).
Also, I sincerely don't want to troll, since I dislike people who troll. If you were to simply tell me what I'm doing that apparently makes me a troll in your eyes, then I can stop. I'm not trying to troll, but it's hard to stop trolling when you aren't told HOW you're trolling. For all I know I could be trolling because I'm using run on sentences (which I'm not), or because I'm posting too much, or making too much threads, or using improper grammar (which I'm not) or any other multitude of reasons.
Back it up. Show me the rule. You want to be a lawyer? You want to put words in Mike's mouth? Show your evidence.
(note: please don't get mad at me or accuse me of lawyering for posting this, since you told me to do it)
Posting Rules #5 says that the best way to counter a mean person is to have a better argument than them. I'm pretty much, with a few exceptions, the only poster in this thread (not forum, but this thread) that's actually made ANY argument, so I followed the rules.
Debating Rules #5 says to back up your claims. I did, you, at the risk of sounding rude, didn't. Again, not lawyering, I'm pointing out the facts that you're requesting me to.
Aministrative Rules #6 says that you can insult the staff during a debate, but not on their performance on their duties. This doesn't really apply since I haven't actually insulted you, but what I'm trying to say is that I haven't actually broken any of the rules.
Oh please, enough of your pithy "woe is me" martyr crap. You've been a net-negative drain on the collective IQ of this board since you joined. That 29 page thread I linked to above, again, had more than one moderator call for your head, a part I noticed you conveniently ignored. In fact, the more "noble" and self-sacrificing you become, the more I am going to flame and insult you for being an obnoxious, sniveling toadie.
Only one moderator called me out on that thread and then left the thread. You still haven't explained how I'm a troll. For other trolls like darkstar, people were super eager to call him out, point out every one of his logical fallacies, destroy his arguments, etc. Yet for me, my arguments haven't actually been challenged.
BTW, are you calling me a troll for this thread or the other thread?