(deleting the requote of myself because let's face it, there's enough of me talking on here)
Funkyterrance wrote: I realize that attempting to use mainly logic in my discussions leaves me quite vulnerable. I consider my Ad Hominem attacks at woodruff to be of a milder nature, if Ad Hominem at all, in that I am simply trying to discredit his methods, not his person. If he would play but the "rules" I would have no reason to even enter that realm. I consider these retorts of mine more "asides" than actual parts of the argument but perhaps its not viewed this way by all involved?
I don't mind logic at all, and in fact encourage it; it's faulty logic (the most common in this forum obviously being that which it is named for) that I dislike. As for snide asides and character attacks... I've used such myself obviously when the mood suited me, but if you try to keep them from interfering with the point of the discussion I will try to do the same (keep in mind, I'll still take pot shots if they're called for, and I expect you'll do the same)
Funkyterrance wrote:As far as those who seem gleeful at the fact that it may have looked like I outright contradicted myself or was misusing a term well, there is a reason I don't take the time to respond to their posts as much as I do to ones such as this. They simply are not sporting enough. I delight in the fact that you, faded, have the ability to throw me a curve. There was a time where these forums had several people could have that affect but sadly they have moved on.
"One is glad to be of service."
Funkyterrance wrote:You must know that I will not resort to Ad hominem attacks if you don't go down that road first. And if I do, call me out on it and I'll apologize.
I shall endeavor to keep my attacks on your person separate from the discussion at hand (see above).
Funkyterrance wrote:As far as Woodruff's idea of the meaning of the word "wrong" not being a question of semantics I am still baffled. I may have used sophistry to get to the bottom of things but only as a tool for redirection, nothing more. I wasn't about to go off on a tangent about it.
the involuted circles of your discussion with woodruff have started making my eyes cross quite frankly, so I'm just going to leave this one alone now... I've enough complications in my life without sorting out who-said-what-meaning-what-to-who especially since I almost need a spreadsheet to keep track of it anymore