My post was a deliberate rambling piece of tenously connected idiocy.. Hopefully to bring a smile and the reference to "Verbiage for Dummies" was certainly a clue... :)
As i clearly (and quite ably..lol) demonstrated, the length of a post nor it's generous use of long words does not in any way give validity or credence to the supposed point it attempts to make...
The intention of my post was to make the point that if anyone has anything worthwhile to say, it can be said in a short and succinct manner..pages not required. The inability to do so is generally reserved for :
A) politicians (who use it to avoid answering a question),
B) debating experts (who will beat the recipient into submission)
C) propagandists and revisionist historians (who believe constant repetition becomes truth and fact)..
As a direct counterpoint in my own post, the last sentence comprised bad spelling, bad grammar and yet one solid point...
I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
-
secret Roland agent
- Posts: 903
- Joined: 18:22, 19 February 2008
- Location: Japan
- Contact:
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
Agreed . . .
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
sRa....where have you been?secret Roland agent wrote:Agreed . . .
-
Amazing One
- Posts: 98
- Joined: 10:48, 10 April 2011
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
Hi Mystic38!
I never use the elephant hurling technique..(no need to).
You made a solid point (which is basically the same thing I said at the end) only if you are not debating on this forum, with the members that commonly post here, having access to the commonly used statements recorded on this forum etc. If one was to give a statement in opposition to yours that was based on the information and facts made available to them in relation to the post you gave your example for.
In the end, it’s most likely that the opposing argument would be considered much more likely and your claim would not hold much weight at all (and remember I said a debate). That’s a conclusion based on logic and is not intended to be offensive at all so please do not take it that way.
No one is forced to enter a debate with another, if one gives a statement and someone opposes it, they can choose not to respond, if one is uncomfortable with that, then perhaps they felt they were misunderstood or there is more they wish to add to their argument that will help make their point. Most often, people keep responding because they feel that there is more for them to say, and the debate goes no for many, many, many pages. And some people who are most likely right look wrong and vice versa. So yes, regardless of the size of a post, most often, people/debaters do feel many pages are required.
It all depends on the nature of the topic, personally, I prefer to have a shorter debate if I already know the conclusion (based on facts etc), want to give my opinion and have been through it all many times before.
I just try to do a good job when I debate (or do anything in life) and say what I feel is required.
Yes. I understood that it was just lighthearted humor hence my..Mystic38 wrote:My post was a deliberate rambling piece of tenously connected idiocy.. Hopefully to bring a smile and the reference to "Verbiage for Dummies" was certainly a clue... :)
And I certainly enjoyed reading it…Amazing One wrote:@Mystic38..lol..nice try but it still needs a lot of work! :-D
Yes, as I said, some matters are extremely complex to sum up in a phrase or two (at least for debating purposes). There is a big difference from using sufficient words to complete a line of reasoning while doing your best to avoid holes in logic and one using the debating technique commonly known as elephant hurling (an attempt to overwhelm an opponent with a massive amount of mostly Irrelevant information when it is not necessary).Mystic38 wrote:As i clearly (and quite ably..lol) demonstrated, the length of a post nor it's generous use of long words does not in any way give validity or credence to the supposed point it attempts to make...
I never use the elephant hurling technique..(no need to).
I have to strongly disagree here.Mystic38 wrote:The intention of my post was to make the point that if anyone has anything worthwhile to say, it can be said in a short and succinct manner..pages not required. The inability to do so is generally reserved for :
A) politicians (who use it to avoid answering a question),
B) debating experts (who will beat the recipient into submission)
C) propagandists and revisionist historians (who believe constant repetition becomes truth and fact)..
As a direct counterpoint in my own post, the last sentence comprised bad spelling, bad grammar and yet one solid point...
You made a solid point (which is basically the same thing I said at the end) only if you are not debating on this forum, with the members that commonly post here, having access to the commonly used statements recorded on this forum etc. If one was to give a statement in opposition to yours that was based on the information and facts made available to them in relation to the post you gave your example for.
In the end, it’s most likely that the opposing argument would be considered much more likely and your claim would not hold much weight at all (and remember I said a debate). That’s a conclusion based on logic and is not intended to be offensive at all so please do not take it that way.
No one is forced to enter a debate with another, if one gives a statement and someone opposes it, they can choose not to respond, if one is uncomfortable with that, then perhaps they felt they were misunderstood or there is more they wish to add to their argument that will help make their point. Most often, people keep responding because they feel that there is more for them to say, and the debate goes no for many, many, many pages. And some people who are most likely right look wrong and vice versa. So yes, regardless of the size of a post, most often, people/debaters do feel many pages are required.
It all depends on the nature of the topic, personally, I prefer to have a shorter debate if I already know the conclusion (based on facts etc), want to give my opinion and have been through it all many times before.
I just try to do a good job when I debate (or do anything in life) and say what I feel is required.
-
secret Roland agent
- Posts: 903
- Joined: 18:22, 19 February 2008
- Location: Japan
- Contact:
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
Hey PauloF.
I'm here! . . . Hmmm . . . I can't quite put my finger on it, but . . . this whole thread kinda reminds me of . . . Oh well! It will come to me!
I'm here! . . . Hmmm . . . I can't quite put my finger on it, but . . . this whole thread kinda reminds me of . . . Oh well! It will come to me!
-
Grammar Wombat
- Posts: 435
- Joined: 01:52, 23 July 2008
- Location: Here
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
Hey, sRa, it is nice to see that you are out of prison and in a better place…
or, at least, a different place.
or, at least, a different place.
Which post?Mystic38 wrote:My post was a deliberate rambling piece of tenously connected idiocy…
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
Lol, too funny...
Now, where's that trap?...hmm
Now, where's that trap?...hmm
Grammar Wombat wrote:Hey, sRa, it is nice to see that you are out of prison and in a better place…
or, at least, a different place.
Which post?Mystic38 wrote:My post was a deliberate rambling piece of tenously connected idiocy…
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
erh.... what are you guys talking about?
Grammar, could you please do something about this weird English these guys are using lately? ;-)
Grammar, could you please do something about this weird English these guys are using lately? ;-)
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
ok, ok, that also sounded weird. Me thinks I meant "these guys have been using lately"...sort of....this weird English these guys are using lately?
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
along the lines of "you don't have to be weird to be English"?..
V-CeeOh wrote:ok, ok, that also sounded weird. Me thinks I meant "these guys have been using lately"...sort of....this weird English these guys are using lately?
-
Grammar Wombat
- Posts: 435
- Joined: 01:52, 23 July 2008
- Location: Here
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
Lately?V-CeeOh wrote:Grammar, could you please do something about this weird English [that] these guys… have been using lately?
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
honestly V-C... doesn't seem you...Grammar Wombat wrote:Lately?V-CeeOh wrote:Grammar, could you please do something about this weird English [that] these guys… have been using lately?
LoL
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
erh.....Grammar, could please JUST DO something .... whatever that might be... it....Grammar Wombat wrote:Lately?V-CeeOh wrote:Grammar, could you please do something about this weird English [that] these guys… have been using lately?
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
Grammar is busy right now...DOESINGV-CeeOh wrote:erh.....Grammar, could please JUST DO something .... whatever that might be... it....Grammar Wombat wrote:Lately?V-CeeOh wrote:Grammar, could you please do something about this weird English [that] these guys… have been using lately?
Re: I hope a 61-key version is on the horizon
Guys the price has and will be $4000, wait and see.....