You got them on the run.

Author: Mall
Coward
chicken
beta

Posts

Total: 41
Topic's author
#1
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 398
Posts: 1,938
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-When they block you for relentless arguing for your position 

- When they block you for being unapologetic 

- When you argue against their position 

-When you disprove their position 

- When they claim they've refuted you then block you for it

- When they get frustrated, upset, gripe because they underestimated the heat of the kitchen they stepped in with you

They're on the run, running scared. When you easily refute someone, you don't run from them.

A boxer that easily thwarts an opponent is not running from him. He is no challenge as the "clubber lang" character said.
#2
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
"Coward chicken beta"
#3
baggins
baggins's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 92
1
3
9
baggins's avatar
baggins
1
3
9
🤣🤣🤣🤣
#4
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
Logic determines the best argument. Not repetition, blocking, or any other interpersonal minutia.
#5
baggins
baggins's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 92
1
3
9
baggins's avatar
baggins
1
3
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Blocking someone who has convinced you they are unable to engage with you in any sensible way after you and many people have tried with logic and reason to explain a simple thing is a simple solution if you do not wish to waste time with them anymore. If they have presented themselves as disingenuous, ignorant or purposely antagonizing blocking someone is just trying to limit your interaction with them as much as possible or simply at least not get notifications from them. In this website blocking is useless so all it does is the “not get notifications” from them. 
#6
baggins
baggins's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 92
1
3
9
baggins's avatar
baggins
1
3
9
-->
@Mall
Btw Mall idk how many people have blocked you but I have blocked you specifically not to @ me in the Forum. I dont mind debating you so if you wish to debate about something this time will be in an actual debate because I dont have patience to repeat the same thing 17 times. So would you like me to create the Evolution debate? 
Topic's author
#7
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 398
Posts: 1,938
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
That's up to you folks that want to debate, apparently I got you on the run.
#8
baggins
baggins's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 92
1
3
9
baggins's avatar
baggins
1
3
9
Does that mean “yes”? Its a yes from me, is it a yes from you too? Because I’ve been accused of being on the run before but when I create the debate it gets deleted. 
Topic's author
#9
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 398
Posts: 1,938
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
You don't want to address me in the forum but want a debate with me, you must address me in the debate  
#10
baggins
baggins's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 92
1
3
9
baggins's avatar
baggins
1
3
9
-->
@Mall
Yeah no problem, you’re unblocked and I can address your arguments in the debate. Can you stop beating around the bushes and say if you want the debate or not? Its a yes or a no question.
#11
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Mall
They're on the run, running scared. When you easily refute someone, you don't run from them.

the only way to win a debate

is to CONVINCE your opponent

if your interlocutor believes you are harassing them

they are unlikely to be CONVINCED


#12
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,622
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@3RU7AL
the only way to win a debate

is to CONVINCE your opponent
I’ve actually only witnessed that once, and it was over a pretty obscure and esoteric subject. More realistically, I think the best metric for winning is who persuaded the bigger percentage of the audience. Intelligence Squared uses this standard, and I think it’s great.

Meanwhile, here at debateart.com, I see people winning most often via forfeit or finding and exploiting a semantic loophole. Or sometimes a judge brings his own argument into play and claims the loser failed to address that issue which never came up in the actual debate.
#13
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,622
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@Mall
“On the Run”


#14
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@cristo71
I’ve actually only witnessed that once, and it was over a pretty obscure and esoteric subject. More realistically, I think the best metric for winning is who persuaded the bigger percentage of the audience. Intelligence Squared uses this standard, and I think it’s great.
persuading an audience is an entertaining metric, but it does tend to favor ad hominem attacks


i try to relate debate skill to real-life one-on-one communication

if you fail to convince the person you disagree with

your argument has failed and you have lost the debate
#15
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,622
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@3RU7AL
So, as long as one refuses to be convinced, one can always win.
#16
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@cristo71
So, as long as one refuses to be convinced, one can always win.
Getting the last word is kinda like win, but yeah, what you said makes no sense as a response. If you cannot win without convincing your opponent, then refusing to be convinced wont get you win if the condition for win is "convince your opponent" and not "refuse to get convinced". Complicated, I know.
#17
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@cristo71
So, as long as one refuses to be convinced, one can always win.
well, it's easy for both sides to lose (both sides remain unconvinced)

and it is possible for both sides to win (both sides learn something valuable)
#18
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,622
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@Best.Korea
How many times have you successfully convinced your interlocutor?
#19
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,622
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@3RU7AL
well, it's easy for both sides to lose (both sides remain unconvinced)

and it is possible for both sides to win (both sides learn something valuable)
Ah, I see. Well, I have seen far, far more (around 99+%) of the former than the latter.

#20
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@cristo71
Ah, I see. Well, I have seen far, far more (around 99+%) of the former than the latter.
that's why developing skill is required
#21
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,622
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@3RU7AL
Do you have some examples of wins to show?
#22
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@cristo71
Do you have some examples of wins to show?

#23
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@cristo71
Do you have some examples of wins to show?

#24
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,622
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@3RU7AL
So in conclusion, Type1 succeeded in convincing you that science IS objective?
Topic's author
#25
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 398
Posts: 1,938
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@baggins
I neither yes or no on that.
Topic's author
#26
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 398
Posts: 1,938
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
I say again. Unless an individual is harassing you to an adverse extent, it's cowardice to get into blocking.

Learn to relax, grow patient, learn a bit.

Now there was an individual on this site that continued to hound my debate topic repeatedly taking every single challenge not allowing others a chance but I didn't block the person.

In this debate arena, you got to have thick skin. Let alone the forum.
#27
baggins
baggins's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 92
1
3
9
baggins's avatar
baggins
1
3
9
-->
@Mall
Me blocking you and still willing to debate you literally proves that what you just said is total nonsense. Blocking doesn’t mean running from you or scared from you.

 You can lose patience when you try to teach a monkey how to do computer programming, that doesn’t mean you’re a coward. Being relaxed has nothing to do with it too. You can be completely relaxed and realize that the monkey just doesn’t have the cognitive abilities to understand complex things. It’s only right to give that up because you will just lose time. So I hope you understand that :

Inpatient ≠ Afraid

Giving up trying to explain something to someone who just doesn’t get it ≠ Afraid

Not engaging with the information given to you ≠ refuting points or disproving points

If you want to keep trying to teach the monkey quantum computing without any success just because you think it makes you have “thick skin” or you think you can “learn a bit” then good luck. 

Now I dont think theres anyone here who is a monkey but Im just making this analogy to show you how nothing of what you said can be connected to “They're on the run, running scared.”.



Topic's author
#28
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 398
Posts: 1,938
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
Unless you're being harassed to a belligerent hostile extent, block them.

But just because you don't like what somebody says, the person doesn't agree with you or maybe doesn't understand that well, you get upset at them, block for it like a punishment.

You're just running from the heat.
#29
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@cristo71
So in conclusion, Type1 succeeded in convincing you that science IS objective?

not exactly,


CON says, (cr2.6) "They apply to reality itself (noumenon) and thus to quanta as well (how noumenon behaves physically).Qualia is the only thing that can be considered not real, as it is the realm of what is imagined or felt and is only a reflection of processes occurring in the realm of quanta."

PRO says, (pr3.6) I'm not convinced the term "fact" can apply to noumenon.  Furthermore I am unable to detect any direct or indirect relationship between noumenon and quanta.  I agree with you that qualia is 99% imaginary, I also believe that quanta is (axiomatically) 100% real.


PRO's round 3 closing statement:

This has been a phenomenal debate.  I would like to thank CON for their focused and well reasoned arguments, fine attention to detail and obvious rhetorical skill.

I would also like to make a note that in the event of a tie on points, I would like to award one additional point to CON (as a tie-breaker) in appreciation their outstanding performance.
#30
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,622
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@3RU7AL
“So in conclusion, Type1 succeeded in convincing you that science IS objective?”

not exactly
Well, you started off by making this claim… exactly:

the only way to win a debate

is to CONVINCE your opponent
Which you even reiterated in a post to me:

if you fail to convince the person you disagree with

your argument has failed and you have lost the debate
Yet Type1 won that debate even after failing to convince you. How confusing! I take it, then, that your above framework is not exactly the case?