2011-07-22, 03:41 PM
Homerowed Wrote:Like 18 times, what is wrong with it?
You basically just told me a tree was a tree. While i can't argue with trees being trees, I was never talking about trees.
Since i know how you feel about analogous statements, I'll do the type of line by line analysis I normally do for satellite to make this as clear as i can for you.
Quote:Needless to say, in life people will always be trying to rip you off in one way or another, and others will be sincere, it is up to you the buyer, to see to it that you know what you are buying and that it is a good deal, you can't expect to trust every random person who sells you something.
Ok? Do you see what I mean about you telling me trees are trees here? You're just repeating yourself. I'm not actually arguing the truth of what you may be saying here, Just pointing out that you didn't really say anything.
Quote:And while scamming might be morally wrong, and the scammer is therefore morally wrong, they did not force you to buy that item, it was your own mistake, just because they gave you the opportunity to make a mistake, doesn't mean no fault lies with you, the scammed.
This just does the same thing as well as not exactly being cohesive with your other statement. You made some (redundant) statements which you obviously believe to be true and think i must also believe to be true. I won't get into the truth of the statements here. That's not what matters. What matters is you just made some (possibly) true statements and think you've made an argument. And since it repeated itself so much and came full circle, it must've been a rather good and sound argument. Impenetrable in fact. Conclusion: you've won. It is now O.K. to bow out while inferring that I must be in some sort of unsound state of mind for my seemingly being opposed to you in your unassailably true argument. Which you proceeded to do. The problem is you didn't ever make an argument. You just made statments which you insist are factual by stating them as facts (without proving or showing any basis for this factuality) but never developed them into anything. You provided yourself some ground to argue from, but you didn't provide any basis for that ground or connect it to mine in anyway. What you've essentially done so far is go: "X is X, therefore i am correct and you cannot be, the end."
What i think you're trying to convey to me is that scamming is the fault of both people. Which is just, "yeah ok whatever" that's obvious.
What is nonsensical is that you think that somehow has anything to do with what i said. You started this "argument." In response to this post:
octopusprime Wrote:Frankly sounds more like scamming.
In which I am saying chicocls talking about a really good deal he got selling 10%s to some guy (it is strongly implied that the guy thought he was getting GM scrolls) sounds like he scammed someone, not made a sweet trade. Notice i'm not judging him or saying OMGwtpBBQ get out scammer. Or scamming is only the scammers fault, you're a bad person.
You respond initially with this:
Homerowed Wrote:Scamming, while looked down upon by certain people, is perfectly fair-play by maple standards. These people willingly bought, with their own money scrolls they thought were something else, however had they taken 5 seconds to look at the scroll instead of trusting a total stranger like an idiot, they wouldn't be at a loss. Scamming, ehhhhhh, more like teaching a few people a lesson.
This is again mostly just an "ok... so what?" kind of a statement. I'm sure you think you're making a grand statement. (or at least thought you were at the time) But it doesn't really have anything to do with anything. You're just telling me that scamming is ok. (which you seem to later say it is morally wrong... Not sure if you're trying to appeal to me there or what) and that it is in part or wholly the fault of the person who was scammed.
So basically I said to chicocl that it seemed like to me like he was saying he scammed someone.
And seemingly out of nowhere you come at me with a statement that basically says "It was their fault for being scammed!"
This didn't really achieve anything for you other than maybe tip me off that you had some guilt to reconcile. Nor did it ever constitute a valid argument. I didn't realize you were attempting a real argument with me at this point.
Do I need to go any further into this? I got the beginning and the end. Nothing too exciting happened in the middle.
WELP, I need to leave now. I probably won't be as bored or just waiting for it to be 3 o'clock so i can take care of some things when return. So don't expect another response like this one. I can hardly see it as being needed again anyway. And even if i were felt it was, i won't be as inclined to spend the time writing it. Until later (or not).