I've been in many debates where the other side would quote my post and, unable to respond to it, say "oh that isn't worth responding to" or "I already disproved that" or simply "haha you lost".

What do you guys do when (or if) somebody does this? One way would be to simply ignore the guy, but on a public forum you may want to make it clear that the guy has no argument.

Whenever possible, try to introduce new ideas that haven't been hashed out over and over.
But sometime's this happens.
Even though the idea is new (or you just think it's new) sometimes someone else thinks it's the same thing.
When this happens....You move on.
Sometimes the only way to win, is not to play the game.

Many of the people here who talk like that have been here so long they are mods or have at least some mod powers.
Chances are, they lock the thread right after.
Don't PM them on it, or they'll threaten you.
If you read the hall of shame posts, you know they use the hammer.
BIG FISH, small pond.
The argument is over. Find something more important to do than being right.

If you are daring, call them on it. Politely ask for links to old arguments. You might learn something new. The worst thing that can happen, is you'll be wrong on a minor point of fanboy trivia about the magical laser on the "Deathstar". I know I can live with that.

To recap.
Move on. Write some original fiction. Toss out another new idea on another part of the forum instead. Comment on the news. Realize you aren't getting paid to debate. Live Happy.

I'm going to say the other thing. Call them on it. Drag their dirty little secrets of "debate" and air the fact that they are simply not responding to you in public. Make it damned obvious that they haven't answered your question.

Then again, as Uncluttered says, if they're stonewalling with ignorance or just blatantly refusing to listen or debate fairly, sometimes you will just have to walk away from the argument.

That sounds like a nice balance.

I only enter into debates/discussions here that have some bearing on my present and future projects. (Otherwise I feel like I'm just fanboy trawling for trivia)
When someone stonewalls, I often say. "Your comment is useless to me without elaboration."
Sometimes it works. Most of the time the thread just dies.

The first one should be called out, and you can call them a coward to boot if you're in a nasty mood. A good way to call it out is to ask them why they think the point isn't worth responding to, or if you're feeling polite to ask them to humor you. The ball is in their court, make them play or make them pay.

The second is a bald faced lie, and should be called a lie if that is possible (some forums are so chickenshit that you will get auto-banned for calling someone a liar, even if you can show it to be true). You could also ask them where and when they dealt with it. Again, you dictate the terms; play or pay.

The third is simple posturing. Mockery is your best bet, and you can even appeal to the audience in most cases because even many Miss Manners forums consider that a form of self-pwnage. You could also demonstrate how by that "logic" you can assert anything you like. Example: "Cheese is made of plutonium." "Why?" "Because I say it is. That's why." Put as simply as that, its obviously absurd.

Its often better to appeal to the audience or readers than the person themselves. If they are this dishonest, its unlikely you will get through to them.

This is somewhat related but how would someone respond to a person who's only "proof" is conspiracy theory? My first thought is to just ignore it out of hand.

If you're under the impression that allowing arguments that have been settled for nearly a decade to continue for no other purpose than to allow people with no experience in arguing the pertinent points to give it a try is a worthwhile use of bandwidth, time, and effort, then you're mistaken.

Use the search function. It's there for a reason, and so very many arguments have been boiled down to extraordinary minutiae that allowing them to begin anew is pointless; the information for drawing informed conclusions exists already.

As to PMs to mods who lock threads; we have rules in place in case you feel you've been treated unfairly by moderator action, and they're right there in the announcements forum for everyone to benefit from.
Aquaint yourself with them, please.


Or, you could use the search function. Why should an erstwhile opponent do your research for you?

---

Life is all the eternity you get, use it wisely.

I think it depends on what your goals are in a debate.

If you are defending a position, you would definitely call them out if they are making an unsubstantiated argument.

If you are arguing to persuade or gain agreement, you could point out the lack of acknowledgment as an oversight and request the argument be addressed. or you could overlook the omission entirely in favor of a more important point.

If you are attacking a position and want to discredit it entirely, by all means rip them a new one for daring to ignore a facet of your argument. Insult their lineage, possibly include some topical humor or deposit that humiliating metaphor on their face.

Thanks, I guess.

Some debaters can be so annoying. This one guy (who argued that Edward could solo the Jedi Order) actually asked me to prove HIS claim; not as a rhetoric, but actually as his argument, and then refusing to prove it himself.