No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
I'm sure that there would have been fine enough if someone had actually said that much in the thread itself. But nobody did. You had two voters who voted with simple, basic reasons, then a mob of others who showed up with the FRAs. Barely any analysis whatsoever. |
I'm sure that there would have been fine enough if someone had actually said that much in the thread itself. But nobody did. You had two voters who voted with simple, basic reasons, then a mob of others who showed up with the FRAs. Barely any analysis whatsoever. |
||
| − | And as for your reasoning itself, it isn't the point. If you felt his own reasoning was faulty, you should have countered him in the thread yourself instead of saying 'this is old/concluded' and asking for closure. Even as the OP, you're very much obligated to point out flaws in people's reasoning, not disregard their replies entirely. And regardless of that, it wouldn't change how utterly vapid much of the prior reasoning in that thread was. |
+ | And as for your reasoning itself, it isn't the point. If you felt his own reasoning was faulty, you should have countered him in the thread yourself instead of saying 'this is old/concluded' and asking for closure. Even as the OP, you're very much obligated to point out flaws in people's reasoning, not disregard their replies entirely. And regardless of that, it wouldn't change how utterly vapid much of the prior reasoning in that thread was, and certainly wouldn't negate the fact that his explanation was astronomically more reasonable than anyone else's in that thread. |
The way it went down was a cheat. Plain and simple. |
The way it went down was a cheat. Plain and simple. |
||
Latest revision as of 09:55, 1 December 2017
@Xansussama:
I'm sure that there would have been fine enough if someone had actually said that much in the thread itself. But nobody did. You had two voters who voted with simple, basic reasons, then a mob of others who showed up with the FRAs. Barely any analysis whatsoever.
And as for your reasoning itself, it isn't the point. If you felt his own reasoning was faulty, you should have countered him in the thread yourself instead of saying 'this is old/concluded' and asking for closure. Even as the OP, you're very much obligated to point out flaws in people's reasoning, not disregard their replies entirely. And regardless of that, it wouldn't change how utterly vapid much of the prior reasoning in that thread was, and certainly wouldn't negate the fact that his explanation was astronomically more reasonable than anyone else's in that thread.
The way it went down was a cheat. Plain and simple.