Next time instead of reporting every vote that isn't in your favor, how about take part in the debate to give some possible reason why a vote could be cast in your favor?
It's a nice hypothetical you present, but ultimately lacking in meaning.
Were they the same person, it would be on him to clarify (make a post to the original that he has changed his name...) and request a reevaluation. As of this moment, there is absolutely nothing to suggest they are the same person; plus he chose to present the arguments in the form of plagiarism, it would be an outright disrespect to his intellectual integrity to judge him otherwise.
That is aside from the obvious sloppy copy/paste job. That it's broken infers lack of access to the original writing (fresh copy/paste from the original writing, as opposed to how it was displayed on a random website, would lack the preponderance of errors).
This debate should probably have a link to a news story in the description. Also a definition of witch hunt.
... I am going to try to give him to benefit of the doubt, as I don't want to believe anyone is that damned pathetic.
You poor baby!
Next time instead of reporting every vote that isn't in your favor, how about take part in the debate to give some possible reason why a vote could be cast in your favor?
Under my proposed refinement to S&G, RM would have won that point as well. A block of text vs the work he put in...
I'm going to re-read this one more time... It's close... Likely I'll end up concluding a tie.
It's a nice hypothetical you present, but ultimately lacking in meaning.
Were they the same person, it would be on him to clarify (make a post to the original that he has changed his name...) and request a reevaluation. As of this moment, there is absolutely nothing to suggest they are the same person; plus he chose to present the arguments in the form of plagiarism, it would be an outright disrespect to his intellectual integrity to judge him otherwise.
That is aside from the obvious sloppy copy/paste job. That it's broken infers lack of access to the original writing (fresh copy/paste from the original writing, as opposed to how it was displayed on a random website, would lack the preponderance of errors).