Sailor Steve and Tribesman

[Sailor Steve]

I have copied the last two posts from the 'Side Discussion' thread and created this new one at the request of members on that thread. I believe it is best to keep this public because the point of this argument is to convince others, not ourselves. On the other hand this makes it possible for anyone to just ignore it, and keeps it from tying up other threads.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Because of course I never post links and a certain person who gets provided specific details on the links has a really really bad memory

Where's the link?

[Jeff-Groves]

Ain't there a rule about posting PM stuff?

"Private Messages are private."

[Jeff-Groves]

I'm only messing with you on rules as you did with me.

I don't have a horse in this race.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Jeff-Groves

Ain't there a rule about posting PM stuff?

"Private Messages are private."

Not when you post something you yourself said.

[Jeff-Groves]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Not when you post something you yourself said.

What if the voice in my head said it?

[vienna]

Whenever I try to listen to the voices in my head, they go straight to voicemail...


<O>

[u crank]

The voices in my head are always arguing. I try to stay out of it.

[Jeff-Groves]

I think mine are complaining about rent.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Pardon?

I thought I would just copy and paste this from a PM to a certain somebody 5 months ago.
That's fine, you have proven that you are a **** so often now that you are able to be classed as an habitual ****.
I have little time for ****s and absolutely no respect for they have to say.
Good day young man.

Yes, that is what you said. And you still haven't proven your claim against me. What you said then is nothing more than your opinion.

As for the other one, Yes, you did direct me to several books of much interest, and I praised you for it. That still is not the same as backing up your arguments publically with links, references and actual discussion. Can you show anywhere you've done that on the forum?

The problem still remains that you have a very long-standing habit of mocking other people's posts without providing any backup to your claims. Don't forget that this started when you yet again chose to make fun of another member rather than actually discuss the issue with him.

What I said here is still true:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

As to the rest, all I've ever asked of you is to:

A) Stop making fun of people you disagree with, and

B) If you make a claim against anyone or their arguments, back it up. It's the claimant's job to prove what they say, with links and arguments. That's the accepted etiquette and everyone else follows it without too much trouble.

Do those two things and you'll never hear from me again.

[kranz]

I can assure you that the care police are on their way.

[Jeff-Groves]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Do those two things and you'll never hear from me again.

I'm laying money that this never happens.
The voice in my head that speaks Spanish agrees I think.
The one that's speaking Romanian? I have no idea what he's talking about.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Links
enough for a start?

You quoting yourself from a PM is not a link.

Was there links?
Did I provide them?
Is your claim that I never provide links baseless?

If there were links then you could link to them now. That's simple enough. Can you?

I'm betting I can show more than 100 instances in which you exhibit the behavior I accuse you of.

Not as easy as Nuremburg as they lack the cross references.
Was there links in the Speer topic?
Did I provide them?
Did I thank the person for the perfect link that provided all the information that was needed?
Did you need help finding the material in the link which was already provided but that you claimed wasn't there?
Did I tell you exactly which sections of the link contained all the information needed?

If this is true then you can show everybody that link now.

Was it a book I told you to read or was it the information already present in the posted link I told you to read?
If it was all in the link and no reference to a book was made does that mean your statement there is not true?

Can you demonstrate this now?

How many others can you show right now? The sole reason I get on you for this is because you have a long-standing pattern of not doing any of those. The most recent example is the attack by you that started all this. You didn't show links. You didn't discuss the topic. You didn't prove your claim that the person you attacked was wrong. You simply mocked your favorite target. This is wrong, and that is why I responded as I did.

Lest you forget, this discussion is at its core about your attack methods. If you're going to accuse someone of having bad arguments it's your job to dig into those arguments and show that they are wrong. Whatever your claims about me, the point is that you do this consistently. You want to argue that you did it properly once, good. That doesn't negate your years-long habit of doing this.

All you have to do is agree to my request in Post #14 and I'll agree to my statement at the end. You could make this end instantly.

[Pisces]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I'm glad you are amusing yourself for your own benefit. I don't understand what's so funny. What I see in your earlier response is nothing more than an icon resembling a written page and a the word "Link" in bold larger text. Nothing actually resembling a link. That comes across to me like a refusal to deliver on the request and a response with the middle finger. Or as a suggestion to "Go reproduce yourself." If so, then Steve has a legitimate reason for starting this thread. Go work on your discussion skills. They are lacking! Very.

[Onkel Neal]

Just show these links, why dodge around it?