Gee, Jodi; then I guess you missed one of TR’s funnier inanities. Here it is for you viewing pleasure, brought fresh from the UT to make marriage a felony thread:
TR obviously forgot to check the dictionary! From Merriam-Webster’s definition for wedding:
TR obviously ignored the very wording of his example about marriage. The participants in that example clearly say “wed.” They did not say “marry.”
Last time I checked, “can’t” and “won’t” are also two different words. Walking away from an argument doesn’t mean the one walked away from won it, it just means it’s over. Thinking you won because you’re the one still standing there is extraordinarily self-centered of you.
Esprix
Ryan - something you just said in the Hillsborough thread:
If you cannot see the irony here then God help you.
pan
Ryan - I don’t think that ANYBODY else reading the abortion thread was under any illusions about Scylla’s position. To me, it was clear. Maybe it wasn’t clear straightaway, but it certainly was long before you sunk your teeth into it. I then thought that Scylla gamely explained the situation. You shook the bone. Pit threads were started about you. Twisty spelled out the situation (and note that Scylla didn’t contradict him). You replied with a ridiculous request to define “pro-choice” when the dictionary definition of ‘supporting legality of abortions’ did quite nicely. Still you grind your teeth further and further into the bone. Why? Are you telling us that you still don’t understand? Are your comprehension skills really that poor? Not that I think this is the case, but does it even matter if Scylla’s position isn’t completely laid out? Since when do we require detailed summaries of everybody’s personal beliefs?
Do you understand why you piss people off so much? Debate requires a certain comprimise on terms and a certain understanding that the meaning is more important than precisely what is said. It also requires that once a point has been debated, it is done. But you never ever let anything go - even when everybody else in the debate has finished with it. It’s like it it TR versus the world and you refuse to give the slightest way until you can declare victory. It’s frustrating. It’s annoying. It is not civilised discourse. And it makes people want to distance themselves from you.
If you are IRL anything like you are on the boards I for one would cross the street rather than say good morning to you. I just wouldn’t have the time to debate the meanings of the word “good”, the implications of the word “morning” and the ad hom attacks that would result as a consequence of my finding it a “good morning”.
At the end of all this you can either take a good long hard look at yourself and admit that maybe, just maybe, there is a grain of truth to this. Or you can declare that this is just one more example of how the world is against you and entrench even more. Your choice.
pan
Monty: If you thought you had a point, why didn’t you present it in the original thread? Afraid your argument wouldn’t stand up to a less favorable audience?
Esprix:
Thank you, Mr. Obvious. Protesilaus can’t present any quote from that thread in which I demand that someone leave, because I did not. Protesilaus can’t show how “similar” and “equal” mean the same thing, because they don’t. Not simply “won’t”, but “can’t”. Cee eh en apostrophe tee. Got that?
No, it’s not just that I’m “the only one still standing”, it’s that I’m right and Protesilaus is wrong. If you have any counter arguments to that claim, feel free to present them. Furthermore, what’s self-centered about saying that since my opponent has no rebuttal, I’ve won? If one baseball team leaves in the middle of a game, is the anything wrong the other team saying “Well, I guess we won, then”?
kabbes
You mean the fact that, had I made the distinction, you would have criticized me, but since it was someone else, you take their side? Yes, there is a certain amount of irony.
Well, bully for you then. Since you’re so adept at reading Scylla’s mind, could you explain to me what this statement means:
Also, could you tell me for each of the following cases whether Scylla would consider abortion moral or immoral, and whether he thinks it should be it legal or illegal:
a) Two months into a pregnancy due to rape
b) Two months into a pregnancy not due to rape
c) Four months into a pregnancy due to rape
d) Four months into a pregnancy not due to rape
Simply repeating what one has already said is not a form of explanation. Posting statement which skirt the issue is not a form of explanation.
No, I didn’t.
No, it doesn’t.
And when instead of focusing on what ToF said, I tried to figure out what he meant, you guys jumped on me.
Am I still posting to the old thread? Just who is it that is not letting this issue die? If you didn’t keep insisting that I’m wrong, I would not be still arguing this.
If you push your debating partner into a state of apoplexy and he drops dead of a heart attack, not from your razor-sharp wit, but rather from your constant niggling, diversionary tactics, meaningless tangents, and outright audacity, does that mean you won, too? I think this is the point many are trying to get across to you.
Esprix
Wow, that’s a toughie. I think I’d like to ask the audience. :rolleyes:
Now I know you’re misinterpreting my posts, The Ryan, because somewhere along the line you’ve gotten the impression that I value your opinion of me.
Well, considering that you probably see yourself as the pinnacle of “adult” debate, I believe I’ll choose to consider this a compliment. I may even decide to include it in my sig! (Opinions, anyone? No, TR, not from you.)
Quick Question for the Mods: The Ryan’s last post (02-12-2001 12:14 AM CST) in the above referenced GD thread is full of material like that. I thought that such statements were considered unacceptable in that forum. Am I mistaken? Thank you for your time.
Back to you, TR. I recommend that you go back and reread the last 3 paragraphs of kabbes’ post explaining why many people, including myself, want little to do with you. Give it some thought.
Actually, moron, I know that point is valid. It obviously belongs in this particular thread because it meshes so well with what Jodi posted about your view of words which really have the same meaning.
Esprix: If you’re trying to convince me that you are, in fact, opposed to dishonest tactics rather than simply making excuses to insult me, then taking Protesilaus’ side really isn’t the way to go. Or show me how making false statements about one’s opponents is somehow not in the same category as what you’re complaining about.
Well, you obviously care very much about proving me wrong. So here’s your chance! Just find that quote! What’s taking you so long?
You thought that calling other people’s posts immature was unacceptable? Then why did you do it?
I thought you said you don’t value my opinion? If you are so bent on convincing me to reevalatuate my position, why don’t you first show me I’m wrong by finding that quote. Until you do, any suggestion from you that I change my posting style will seem hypocritical.
a)moral, legal
b)immoral, legal
c)moral, illegal
d)immoral, illegal
or, for a more complete answer:
a)unfortunate but understandable, legal
b)to him, unjustifiable but still legal 'cos he hasn’t the right to impose his morals
c)arguably moral - a point he was at the time willing to discuss (not argue) but illegal since by this time he feels the foetus is a human being
d)totally immoral, definitely illegal.
I wasn’t even particularly following the thread and yet I’d determined this well before you started your typical single-minded mega-hijack. And it is a hijack to focus so exclusively on a minor point that nobody else cares about.
I notice you have chosen to ignore the important part of my post - that in which I suggest you take a long hard look at the way you obsess about the trivial rather than the meat - but somehow I don’t find the irony amusing.
pan
I’m sorry, where, exactly, did I even mention Protesilaus? I’m still talking in general terms you and the way you debate on this board. I am not speaking to anything specific between you and him, nor about any specific thread, since I haven’t read the one you and he are discussing.
Furthermore, do not assume that because you’ve driven your opponent over the edge of insanity by questioning every word and exploring every possible derivation of every single detail of an argument, and then they don’t directly quote every cite you ask them for, that they can’t, when in fact they simply won’t. This doesn’t mean you can claim victory in the debate, it just means the debate is over.
Esprix
Esprix, I think you need to back off. You just admitted that you aren’t following TR and Protesilaus’ argument, why do you make assumptions about it? You’ve been gunning for TheRyan since page 1, and you still admit to generalities. I think you should find your beef with him, air it, and move on.
You see, this is the beauty part of TR’s style. He will split hairs, call you names, obfuscate, fillibuster, bully, contradict himself and generally use any means neccesary to make all other debators throw their hands up in the air with disgust.
At this point he has won the debate. Just as long as he is the last poster, he is right. And since he is right so often it stands to reason that he is smarter, more adult and an all around better person than anyone who disagrees with him.
Circular logic? Not if The Ryan posts last.
Oh, drat - I seem to have forgotten I’m not allowed to play in the Pit, nor to have negative opinions, nor to voice them. It’s not been a good day… 
I am only speaking from my own experience in my past conversations on this board with The Ryan, so, to that point, nothing I’ve said has been inaccurate, at least from my point of view. That is why I have not, nay cannot speak about any interactions he’s had with other posters in threads I haven’t read. The points I addressed were only observations about how The Ryan defends his debating style, when, from my experience, they are weak defenses.*
Esprix
[sub]*The opinions expressed in the above post are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the views of any other individual, poster, the gay community, the Straight Dope Message Board, the Chicago Reader, Cecil Adams, the United States of America or the third planet from the star Sol. Your mileage may vary in all cases.[/sub]