>>8535Oh wow, you have a background in linguistics, psychology, politics, sociology and math! Congratulations! Is that how you ended up inventing a syntax-less language?No idea what you're even posting, nor does it relate to anything we were discussing. Hi! Thanks for dropping by!
>>8537So attacking someone in a passive-aggressive manner without naming names or stating facts counts as a constructive criticism. How can I justify the wild leaps of logic in that statement? Why blame me? Whose actions did you disapprove of, and explain why you believe I reacted "insecurely"?
>>8534Never mind that fact-checking and evidence-based reasoning are essential components of debate, and, uh, people who dodge addressing evidence aren't great debaters.You know perfectly well that master and I discussed this topic first in a thread that's lost to the ages, where you started implying we knew each other online and regularly talked. Bring it up again!
>>8538Wait, you're suddenly upset over concrete examples, but happily ignore the repeated manipulation of definitions and cherry-picking evidence to support your pet theories. Weirdly selective outrage from you.Where does this line of questioning lead to?
