In light of how horribly I have behaved on several threads that involved arguments, and how much I have argued pointlessly over, I would like to apologize. I found a handy hint how to argue more fairly on forums though. The structure of an argument should go like this:
1. Opening statement by the defendant, they say what they think and why.
2. Your counter attack
3. Counter-counter attack by defendant.
End of argument.
Now most of you will say "That's too short" and "Why do they get to say the last word" and other versions and kinds of whining. Simple reason: Arguing isn't about pointless warfare of words or needlessly attacking viewpoints, as I have done before. Arguing means getting people to your side, and if you can do it in one post, then you are an excellent arguer. Once you've had a go, someone else can fight for you. Once. Like flintlocks, we can't go again. So if you find yourself endlessly fighting over nothing, think of what I've said here. Stop the argument, excuse yourself, and leave.
Thanks for reading, if you ever see me not abiding by these rules, berate me.
This reminds me of a much more formal thread that's still in the WEPR to this day.
Speaking of arguments and the Tavern though, this is grounds for someone to make a satirical Guide to Settling Tavern Arguments!
Think about it.. this isn't the WEPR. I don't know what it is today, but in my time it was a bastion of wit and stupidity, and a slaughterhouse for fools and imbeciles. Arguments do prop up in the Tavern, but they're usually trivialized in some manner.
Thanks for reading, if you ever see me not abiding by these rules, berate me.
@knight_34 Ahh, but is that thread also an apology? And I don't quite follow you. Are you being sarcastic or true with your Guide to Settling Arguments?
@Nichodemus I suppose engineering has lots to do with arguing. No one knows it better than you, Nich. I do know it won't work, but hey, I'm a try-hard, foolhardy seadog. What could ever go wrong with my plans?
*Lieutenant says something about fixing the mainmast with the tar reserves* "Shut up, lieutenant! You had the men put it together wrong!"
Never mind, knight. This is why I should read things four times over. Three was not enough. Because if I put it in the WEPR, it would be a violation. The WEPR is for serious stuff regarding events, politics and religion. This little guide shouldn't be there.
How to settle trival arguments? That's an easy one, increase the ferocity of your attacks until your target is reduced to a crying mess who leaves the site.
How to settle trival arguments? That's an easy one, increase the ferocity of your attacks until your target is reduced to a crying mess who leaves the site.
314D1 has mastered this skill.
After reading this, I realize that I think it's right. After one or two points are made, it's just correcting every other sentence of the other's rebuttal.
The fun in arguing comes from pointing out the specific logical fallacies in the other's argument or watching people rage over the internet.
True wisdom.
Also, use sarcasm. Can't have most discussions on the internet any other way, because the other person will most likely never admit that they're wrong and keep going on and on about it, so you use sarcasm and watch their reactions. This will bring out their true colours.
This will never work out. Trust me, I'm an engineer.
The last time I trusted an engineer...
314D1 has mastered this skill.
314d1 does it in a revolting manner.
How to settle trival arguments? That's an easy one, increase the ferocity of your attacks until your target is reduced to a crying mess who leaves the site.
Hey, that's how they already settle arguments on the WEPR! Doing that elsewhere would be very dickish.
i offer this nugget of wisdom trith be told this thread is pointless because even though you posted it with good intentions most people whom you have angerd through pointless bickering will not have seen this thread or not realized that it has been directed towards them and most people who will see it will ignore it and continue to argue i offer myself as evidence.This was made as a joke for the sake of arguement on a thread about arguement thus my point is void and invalid
I've looked at your replies while listening to sinister music. As such, I cannot find the patience to suffer your petty, irrational, completely human ideals. I merely posted an idea. The fact that I've managed to ignite a small argument amuses me no end. Tack, everyone. Tack.
If you are able to put in the information that you want to and also add a hidden insult or two within it then it should be considered a succesfull argument.IF you can point out flaws of your oppenent's idea without giving your idea a area that they can attack to is a huge gain for you.There is no one way to argue with somone.There is no format,It changes almost everytime with the information that is given.
