Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kaimetsu
So statements of opinions can't start arguments? What can?
|
The conflicting opinion put against it.
Quote:
|
You're being patently ludicrous. If somebody makes a derogatory remark about me and I respond, I'm the one starting the argument? And yet if somebody punches me then he started the fight? How do you explain this distinction?
|
"I want to punch him, he deserves it". Someone punches him. Indirect.
Person described above just Punches him.direct
"I think you wil ldo this". Indirect.
"You will do this". Direct.
Want me to reiterate this about 50 more times? WIl lyou understand then?
Quote:
|
Um. Ostensibly this is a 'joke'? If so, why are you hiding behind it? I made a point: You started the discussion of language when you challenged my use of it.
|
You accused me of something I did not do. That started it.
Quote:
|
Define "direct attack", and then show that it makes a difference.
|
See above.
Quote:
|
Completely untrue. My first post summarised what you did and then claimed that it constituted putting words in my mouth. My second defined exactly what the phrase means. I didn't even declare that either of us was right or wrong - I just said my piece and left it at that.
|
"No, not really" is saying i am wrong. There's one thing wrong with this argument. I did the same thing you did postwise, also. The last one is the only one then, by your standards, that could arguably be considered asserting I am right with no backing. Though by your standards, it was further clarification.
Quote:
|
You, on the other hand, started with the declaration that I was wrong and then repeated your definition of the phrase. You apparently think that the winner is whoever can continue to say "I'M RIGHT NANANA" for the longest before he gets bored.
|
No, see above.
At this point, the only thign we could clarify is who started the argument. With no written definition of what putting words in one's mouth is, it makes this whole argument pointless. If you wish to continue though, I can.