Take it all as a bit of a joke. Iâm sure even the most rude posters can be nice enough ingame when you have a one on one chat with them. Itâs just the nature of the beast for the forums to be rude.
1 Like
They donât have to be in the same phrase, as long as they are associated, the result is the same.
He probably doesnât because youâre wrong and her point is in fact not a tautology
After the incorruptible (read: unfixable) supreme grasp upon the English language youâve demonstrated in this thread I canât believe I have to correct the old dragon, but if you were to actually google what tautology is you would find this as the first and main definition:
the saying of the same thing twice over in different words, generally considered to be a fault of style (e.g. they arrived one after the other in succession).
Which unless youâve somehow unlocked [Spectral Sight] on the forums makes the point youâre chasing simply incorrect (as you almost always and exclusively are)
Here are some more fun things for you to look up and incorrectly use in the future:
Synonym: a word that means the same thing as another word (sound familiar?)
Polysemy: a capacity for a single word to have multiple meanings
Antonym: a word that means the opposite of another word
Contronym: a word that is the opposite of itself
Happy language butchering, dragon erper
Canât help but think part of the issue is perception of tone. Noticed that IG people tend to use emoticons and such more, or the text⌠equivalent⌠they are text. Yeah. : ) : P etc. Whereas here, if they are used, theyâre almost used in mockery.
And of course people read something as hostile or angry when itâs typed out in, from the posters perspective, calmness.
Forums. Weird places.
Yeah. You honestly need to go all out with the theatrics to get your emotions across sometimes.
Yeah Iâm thinking you donât like your own argument technique returned back to sender - ie. rewriting the definition of harassment (a legal term, right?) to amount to âsomeone called someone else stupid in a single threadâ
The definition you linked there now applies very easily to what youâre doing towards Vixi and I donât know why youâre pretending you canât see that. Even if you do consider them a bully (as you have repeatedly said) does that make what youâre doing some sort of heroic counter-bullying? Their comeuppance perhaps?
Thatâs absolute bag and you know it. You canât call one mean-spirited action harassment and then do the same action, rebranding it as âOK because actually they said it themselves!â or âitâs actually simply a callout ⌠aka. like a lightforged version of bullying that only I can doâ. Maybe you should follow through with your own rhetoric here and apologise to Vixi who you have âcalled outâ (but not harassed! 
) for about three hours straight. Be the change you want to see in others
The truth is if you had said âyeah, I did it back so whatâ that would have been easier to swallow (and basically understandable) than this circular attempt at obfustication. Youâre struggling to reconcile your high-minded stance and the much less clean reality of how you act and no amount of cope can flip that on its head
Despite that I enjoyed our argument a lot so hopefully we can disagree on something another time later in the week (ideally on the weekend since weâve stayed up quite late for this one and Iâm not going to be #MCLOVIN the alarm when it goes off)
Take it easy & catch you on the flip side 
3 Likes
Her usage of the term is a pleonasm, and her argument is kinda a non-point, circular, and non-pertinent to the discussion. But you do you, if you want to pat yourselves on the back, do it. Itâs 4 am and Iâve got better things to do. Like sleeping.
Generally speaking thereâs always been groups (back in the day it was skype/MSN cliques) that have tried to control the server, or âleadâ the community which basically means the popular group decides whatâs acceptable. The forums were really only civil from Vanilla to late BC and then around early wrath when the moderaters disappeared things started to change. Before green posters like Adnaw or Tsathogga were able to highlight bad behaviour, the blues very heavily moderated the forum. The community policed itself. If you wanted to make a point you were expected to be civil or you got a vacation. Even in the RP forum which was a small sub forum back in the day had an active blue poster.
It was very easy to get banned, the game, the community, the internet (no widespread nihilistic imageboard culture) and Blizzard were very, very, different. GMs in game were very active and the realm actually had RP rules that HAD to be followed etc. Itâs far too much to unpack but the short answer is Blizzard tore their games ethos up and got rid of their support staff.
No it isnât
How ironic because I donât think thereâs a single reply from you on these forums that isnât a pleonasm
Note: My next post is going to be one big joke response. If you donât want to see some cringey overacting you might want to use this blocklist to block me.
One: Use quotation marks. Two, when your argument is utterly incomprehensible, then it is a bad argument, as it is failing to do itâs job, that is, to convey your viewpoint and reasoning, or the counterpoint and reasoning to anotherâs viewpoint.
You utter hypocrite.
P.Q.E.D: Point, Quotation, Explain, Discuss. Learn to argue coherently, please, and put the damned thesaurus down.
2 Likes
See, thatâs a tautological statement! An argument that doesnât make a point is not pertinent to a discussion, so specifying that it is also not pertinent is redundant.
1 Like
good god, man, you really are an insufferable twazzock arent u
4 Likes
The fact you donât understand the need for certain things to be said in certain terms doesnât mean they shouldnât be said in these terms, Iâm afraid.
My argument is really simple.
She argued that Perroyâs claim that he had a reason to do what he did is âtechnicallyâ true. Because he is justified to do so. And justification to her means having a reason; any reason.
Basically: Perroy had a reason because he had a reason.
So yes, thatâs a tautological argument right there.
No itâs not actually. I think you just donât get it
Anyone else remember this
Ah, of course. The ambiguity! That ambiguous ambiguity with all its guityâŚGUITYNESS that managed to confuse nobody other than you. Is that the gooey ambiguity you mean? Because that sounds rather sticky and like you might want to get it checked.
I know right? Could you imagine someone doing that? That would be pretty cringe and guity. Ooh! Got him! 2-0!
ACSHUALLY this is all typed and thush it ish me wanting to be read schmart not schound schmart. Thank you very much!
Breaking characters for a moment to point out that I never related my point to Perroyâs reason but Perroyâs statement that people arenât just chaotically cruel. Also I never said that I felt Perroy was morally justified from my perspective.
Perroyâs reasons are complex. If you got that reference you deserve a cookie.
I agree so letâs talk JUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSTIIIIIIIIIIIFIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIED!
1 Like
Because they must have any reason to act, like being sadic? Thatâs pretty chaotic to me, imo, but you do you.
But I understand where you come from better now, and kinda appreciate the spirit behind.
https://i.gyazo.com/2ef491e63316540145c565870e3e7631.jpg
[would attempt to percieve the truth written on the elder scroll]
2 Likes