• Warl0k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    In most debates

    This isn’t a debate. I’m not attempting to persuade you. This is a discussion. I am criticizing you. I am discussing your initial and subsequent behavior that is self-evident in this discussion in a critical manner.

    You cannot win, nor lose, a discussion - that just doesnt make sense - and that is in no small measure why I’ve refused to engage with you when you bring in unrelated topics to debate. Allowing a debate to expand from the initial topic could allow someone, acting in bad faith, to conflate the new debate topics and the initial discussion topic (my criticism) as being inherently linked, and thus imply they are points that someone could “win” or “lose”.

    I have no interest in this discussion becoming a debate - I have made my assertions, have maintained those assertions consistently and those assertions have since been shown to be completely validated. There continues to be nothing that I need to add to that.

    • Yggstyle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I have no interest in this discussion becoming a debate.

      And yet…

      I have made my assertions, have maintained those assertions consistently and those assertions have since been shown to be completely validated.

      Ah yes “I have made a assertion… And then arvived at the difficult conclusion that my own assertion is correct.” This child like circular logic could best be added to with a reinforcing such iron-clad reasoning with some sort of additional …

      There continues to be nothing that I need to add to that.

      Hah. This brings joy. The pure contradiction makes this the cherry on top.

      I digress - If you’ve nothing to discuss… And your assessment is beyond reproach - seeing you determined it as such… One does wonder how such strong, unwavering, statements need so much attention to remain standing. The mind boggles.

      For someone with so little to say and so little you’re willing to discuss… It does amuse how dutifly you return to parrot the same thing, claim you words to be self-evident, and then huffily exit again. Its almost endearing.

      • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        If you’ve nothing to discuss

        I’ve plenty to discuss. That’s why we’ve been having an ongoing discussion about my initial topic for more than a day now.

        the difficult conclusion that my own assertion is correct.

        It wasn’t difficult to arrive there, you yourself confirmed it was correct.

        The pure contradiction

        There has been no contradiction. You (unfortunately I must suspect intentionally given your past admissions) misunderstand - clarifying the situation while you attempt to erode the surrounding discussion adds nothing to my points here. I’ve already said all I need to say in support of that topic, the rest of this is just reiterating those same points.

        I’m here to explain that concept, as you have continued to engage as though you may not understand it. And because you are providing a mountain of examples of how someone acting in bad faith might attempt to draw another party into engaging with them on their terms, and that’s interesting. Less interesting now that I have clarified that point, of course - your responses will be inherently less valuable because you’re aware of that regardless of your motivations - but that’s a sacrifice I’m quite happy to make in the interests of furthering your understanding in this discussion.


        To summarize: I’ve added nothing to my initial points because there is nothing I need to add. Every subsequent reply I’ve made has been to explain this, and the reasons for this, to you. I am quite happy to continue doing this as long as you would like.