Two Plus Two Newer Archives

Two Plus Two Newer Archives (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   Politics (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=43)
-   -   *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=558531)

pvn 12-01-2007 10:39 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
Its worth pointing out to the those not in the know that the reason some are being so aggressive about cyrus is that he regularly crushed them in debate.

Most of if not all of the mud slinging and accusations constitute the archest hypocrisy and pot meet kettle.

[/ QUOTE ]

If by "crushed" you mean "used tons of ten-dollar words, cleveryly constructed logical fallacies, and tons of intellectual dishonesty" then yeah, you're right. And I try not to throw the "intellectually dishonest" label around as freely as many here do.

Cyrus is a smart guy, no doubt. And he did OK in debates, but for every debate he did well in there was another one where he limped around on (very well-camouflaged) bait-and-switches.

pvn 12-01-2007 10:40 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
In Cyrus' defense he was specifically named by Sklansky, along with El Diablo, as some who was "smart" and "has obviously thought about things". So I'd say DS probably disagrees with a few of BT's caricatures.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cyrus had definitely thought about alot of things. One of the things he thought a lot about was winning debates through deceit and lawyering.

pvn 12-01-2007 10:40 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
Why would Cyrus have come back as Mickey Brausch once he was banned if he was already actively using the mrick account?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not convinced that mrick = cyrus, but Cyrus is NOT dumb and he was SO transparent in posting as MB that he had to figure that someone would catch on and give him the boot.

BluffTHIS! 12-01-2007 10:43 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
through deceit and lawyering.

[/ QUOTE ]


ElliotR resembles that remark. Knowing that someone is a lawyer makes the odds he is a liar better than 50/50.

DVaut1 12-01-2007 11:13 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
If by "crushed" you mean "used tons of ten-dollar words, cleveryly constructed logical fallacies, and tons of intellectual dishonesty" then yeah, you're right. And I try not to throw the "intellectually dishonest" label around as freely as many here do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've yet to understand the magical distinction between "intellectual dishonesty" and "non-intellectual dishonest". Corollary to that, I don't think I've ever seen a compelling argument that "intellectual dishonesty" means anything more than "I have a fundamental disagreement with this poster but I'm out of relevant objections to what they're saying and yet they continue to disagree with me, so I'm going to accuse them of intellectual dishonesty and hope the [censored] sticks".

BluffTHIS! 12-01-2007 11:30 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
DV,

Do you see any distinction between two persons who in debate utilize a logical fallacy, perhaps a subtle one, but where one is ignorant of the fact he is so using that fallacy, and the other intentionally uses same in order to mislead?

It seems to me that in debate, we should be seeking to get at the root of our disagreements and examine same. Since two honest debaters can arrive at different conclusions, the usual cause of same is differing axioms, or perhaps unstated premises, on which the logic of the argument rests. But surely the first step in analyzing another's arguments is to see if the logical chain is valid, so as to be able to focus in on the premises and whether they are valid, far-fetched or unprovable, etc.

However if the object of debate is to "win" via any means possible in the manner of a slick lawyer or salesman, then I guess it is only the efficaciousness of the rhetoric to persuade the unthinking or unlearned that matters.

ElliotR 12-02-2007 12:26 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
hahahahahahaha This is great!

I must confess, I started this thread because I was about to get on a flight home and wondered what would happen without my ability to respond to the inevitable BluffTHIS! excuse making. Seeing all this 11 hours worth of flying later is a rich reward indeed.

For the record, it will come as no surprise that BluffTHIS! is full of it.

As to his number 3, the notion that he and he alone knew that Mickey was Cyrus at any point is laughable.

And as to number 5, I challenge you to post evidence that I've used gimmick accounts. C'mon, BluffTHIS! Put up or shut up, buster.

BluffTHIS! 12-02-2007 12:58 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
The "evidence" is your indignation in the past when I've posted that I believe it is in bad form/spirit to use gimmicks in this forum to make "substantive" posts (as opposed to obvious jokes). By no means conclusive but indicative nonetheless. However are you denying same?

vulturesrow 12-02-2007 01:17 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this proves he isnt the same person how?

[/ QUOTE ]

Proof? Where did I claim to "prove" anything? Even a court of law only requires reasonable doubt. I just gave you plenty of grounds for that. So where's the "proof" that he is in fact Cyrus? Let us see it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok Im really not down with getting involved in this drama. I just thought it was ridiculous to use that as proof or even reasonable doubt in the case of a person that was known to have used more than one account....

[/ QUOTE ]


Why would Cyrus have come back as Mickey Brausch once he was banned if he was already actively using the mrick account? You really don't think there's even a hint of "reasonable doubt" here? I sincerely hope you never serve on a jury or court-martial, sir.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, I'll give you a "hint of a reasonable doubt"; I'm feeling magnanimous tonight. I just hope that I one day possess the acumen and the keen analytical skills to see, as you do, why the registration date matters in the case of a person that was known to use more than one account, on a board where the creation of a new account is trivially easy, sir. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

ElliotR 12-02-2007 01:25 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
The "evidence" is your indignation in the past when I've posted that I believe it is in bad form/spirit to use gimmicks in this forum to make "substantive" posts (as opposed to obvious jokes). By no means conclusive but indicative nonetheless. However are you denying same?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am indeed. Moreover, I want to see the links to what you call my "indignation".


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.