Total posts: 19,931
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
When you say 'terrible argument' I just want you to explain why it's terrible, that's something ramshutu never ever does and it really irks me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
If you aren't lying, there's 18 hours left to vote on the 'daylight saving time' debate.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The definition of 'worst' means irritates the most with regards to a Reddit-vote-based system using the word 'worst'.
So, obviously most people are going to be irritated by things that make most people feel that this individual feels undeservedly above most people.
It's a pretty logical profile-type to end up as the most irritating. I actually have found that usually the guy/girl who thinks he/she is the smartest in the room actually is usually among the top 20% of people in that room but not necessarily is the smartest at all.
The idea that smart people keep their mouth shut and stay humble comes from an overexaggerated interpretation of Dunning-Kruger effect. Not all geniuses fail to realise what they are and not all idiots don't know they are, either.
Put me in a situation where social skills matter, I will seem like a flailing fish who is struggling to stay mediocre. Put me in a situation that involves fast calculations and both deceiving and overcoming deception and you'll find a groundbreaking genius.
Einstein was spot on with the fish and tree-climbing analogy, it's just a less applicable one to this scenario as I'm talking about me in particular.
Created:
-->
@David
@bsh1
callout thread k thx bai
Created:
@RM: I refer you to both my RfD and the debate we had. I don’t believe you will be able to grasp that you’re arguments are not as amazing as you claimed, leave alone grasp why even if I spent the next thousand posts trying to explain it.
"will be able to"
"even if I"
Just do it, clear it up for everyone.
Given you’re propensity for saying things that are objectively in true - that I vote down people at the same ranking as me (objectively false), that you explained why Daylight savings is anachronistic (you didn’t anywhere)
I could have done it in a more detailed way, that would be gish gallop and you'd vote against me for that. :)
I did, nonetheless, do precisely this in the least effort needed in my R2 and R3.
Created:
I have been through much worse than this in life, you're just unusual as you have such a high percentage of influence around here for now. Patience will be my friend here.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
You sit there looking down at me cackling with superiority but in time I will show you who is unbreakable and who was all along nothing but a hypocrite who preyed on weak debaters and ran like a pussy cat around the other big beasts of the jungle. I have a 40% winrate against them? You have a 0% because the debate against me wasn't a real debate, it was you pandering to the masses where anything I prove was a wrong reason to vote becomes you 'honestly being that deluded'.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
RM claims that I ignored a point he made in R4. In reality the part of the RFD wasn’t referring to this argument, but another related argument. RM has no response - and he simply asserts this claim a second time in the previous round (he could have quoted other examples throughout the debate where he made this argument and I hadn’t addressed it)”
You actually named one of the biggest points; game theory. You said it was a tangent but it was the most fundamental element to explaining how different this is to other technological advancements so far and why it will snowball out of control. You named it for me, I didn't have to bring it up.
Created:
I’m sorry you don’t seem capable of recognizing your own failures. But right now I’m spelling out literally and objectively what your problem is, and what happened to you specifically - I don’t think you’re smart enough to recognize failures in your own reasoning even if I were to spend another year posting in this thread trying to explain them.
Hahaha, I can recognise my failures just fine. Can you recognise yours?
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
If you don’t grasp his illegible 100 word long sentences presented in incoherent walls of text that is bordering on incomprehensible for the entire debate doesn’t land you a violation for S&G - then there is no number of posts I can make here that can possible correct your faulty thinking on this.
You should just have said this and shut the fuck up. You can't post a single coherent reason why you voted against me in almost any debate where you did vote against me. You slip past a broken system that allows bullshit votes to pass and defend against it by preying on easy opponents or taking very mainstream sides and playing to the heartstrings of an impotent voter-base by mimicking popular stances and takes on things.
You wouldn't stand a single chance against me in a debate where actual logic was how we determined the winner.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
ok ty in advance, please be clear on what i did and didn't do in your RFD.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
Created:
-->
@K_Michael
Win percentage yes, rating no.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Likewise the idea that it’s taking jobs is bad too, any technology improvement does this.
I didn't say that, even once. Nice assuming I'd take the standard route.
Your opponent had the higher ground
Do you like to invent terms and concepts in debating as you go along?
- because your opponent framed the technology was simply an extension of existing technology and the same as other technological developments in the past -
Which I disproved in the entire debate, explaining just how unique this case is.
and you charged up and tried to fight to that hill by picking issues that would largely be problems with existing technology. The result was then mostly an inevitable matter of record - as Oromagi clearly knew his stuff.
Such as? Logic pathing of robots reaching a stage of predicting human though process and behaviour? Or what? Did you even read my Rounds past R1? I don't think so.
"Oromagi clearly knew this stuff" what stuff? did you even read a single word that I wrote?
This combined with you going off on the pointless Game theory rabbit hole, bizarre nonsense about blackmail, and your reliance on subjective opinion vs Oromagi presenting facts, is why you lost that one.
That is the most important point of the entire debate. That is why this is so different to other technological developments so far, the very thing you said I had to address.
Even in your recent abortion debate - You were faced with an opponent who asked where in the constitution does it say abortion is a right: you could have cited that the Supreme Court is afforded the power to determine what is and is not constitutional, and did so in this case under the grounds that woman’s control over their own body is protected by the right to privacy, and that the constitution explicitly states that no rights are abridged if not enumerated. Like three sentences - boom, win. Instead your approach was to launch a mostly nonsensical tactic of presenting your opinion of what the theme of the constituent was; which is in no way shape or form bore any relation to justifying why the specific text or legal aplication of constitution legally allows for abortion.
do you like rebuking my points? You can't come up with your own arguments or 'the argument I should have used instead' as a reason to vote against me, not ever.
This is what I mean by errors: I think you need to recognize these failures rather than attribute them being called out to malfeasance.
What errors are you referring to? I am yet to see one.
Created:
Like I showed in the debate, you don’t appear to be able to accept any criticism from anyone;
I know exactly what dunning kruger is and on my rise as a player of many games from Poker to League of Legends to Debating all the way through to getting by with people socially, I learned a lot about it. I am immune to Dunning-Kruger now (not naturally, but self-taught) because I derive my confidence at something from progress over time. I do not need to prove a thing to you about it, I know what precisely it is to measure progress and admit when I'm moving down and/or up, objectively at the art and science of a given skill.
your issue with me is not that I vote unfairly, but really that I vote more.
These are not mutually exclusive.
You’ve accused the overwhelming majority of individuals who have voted against you prior to our debate of not understanding your position, or being terrible voters.
That is true, I will admit that most humans are terrible comprehenders of logic but I struggle to understand why when I put extra effort into making an airtight case I was told I gish gallop'd when that was literally the singular best constructed debate on this entire website (my opponent had no way to win no matter what).
Obviously, one of the main issues is that when we debate, we always think our own arguments are phenomenal, and unbeatable.
You are not me. I know what you are referring to and most people do indeed either suffer from that or the opposite; infinite humility and fear. I suffer from neither. I think thoroughly through what the opponent can run via logic paths (which are things you need my brain or somethign similar to it to truly comprehend) and I spot traps, dead-ends, ways to loosen an otherwise airtight logic-chain etc. If you are familiar with computer programming and/or building to a high enough level, you will have come across logic pathing but it doesn't explain how to translate that into real-life situations where not everything is a clear '1' or '0'.
The only time I slipped up was with blamonkey because I genuinely didn't think about the idea that juries don't represent the norm. He is wrong but I didn't realise how difficult it is to prove.
When someone doesn’t agree with you, you’re comparing a voter who read what you wrote vs the person in the world who best understands your argument, and is always 100% on your side. It’s easy for many individuals to presume the issue is solely with the voter and not with the arguments because, well, your brain tells you that they’re fantastic.
My brain doesn't tell me that my arguments are fantastic, my comprehension of what my opponent presented vs mine and how to render the resolution true are how I conclude it.
I am unable to test your metacognition, but this type of issue is the inherent source of the Dunning Kruger Effect, and why political extremists are unable to recognize their own errors.
Yeah, do you know the biggest sufferers from DK are those who accuse everyone else of it? Think about it, who is the worst sufferer of delusion? It's the one saying everyone is deluded about their own ability no matter what.
So, as you seem to object: I’ll give you an example of your Automomous vehicles issue. Let’s ignore the indesciphedable language; there were obvious and clear benefits of moving to autonomous vehicles.
Lol! obvious? Is that tabula rasa? Obvious because you said it's obvious, indecipherable because you can't decipher it, yeah okay.
To fight this, a “who could be blamed if there’s an accident” is a bad argument
Bad... What do you mean by bad? Bad because you say it's bad?
- as we currently already have major industries that face similar issues, and they are able to overcome the issues.
Oromagi never said that. You came up with your own rebuttal there.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
No, the failures are not all my own. I do believe my main failure was having debates at all until the voter base grew to be more than your abusive, grudge-bearing self.
Other than that, I've been brilliant as fuck as both a site user and debater so far, thanks for the pointless feedback. When you say 'irrelevant to the resolution' what you always mean is 'I don't understand the point'. I have noticed this by being patient and hearing you fully elaborate on things like this in the past, it ends at 'it's shit because I say it's shit' each and every time. :)
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
Among the pile of horseshit you just typed, this was the highlight:
I am more than willing to help completely deconstruct your debates with you, and break down the specific errors you made and explain how you can improve. Everyone here would be. I think that may be the best step for you to appreciate the type of errors you are making - but first you need to accept that you are making them.
Sounds like a Priest saying first you have to believe in Jesus as the son of God, then you'll find out he is real.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
"in a rock" was meant to be in a rocket (literally in it meaning you're destroyed)
"so what if they say you're an idiot" instead of "so what if they you're an idiot"
I did double check it but that slipped my eyes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Oromagi posted past the deadline, you said the timestamp is what matters. He was past it.
Created:
-->
@Speedrace
Castin, janesix, Zeichen and Analgesic.Spectre are 4 examples but considering how the latter 2 carry themselves I think it's best we go with that theory.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Where is Virtuoso's entry? Does he score 0?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Is Oromagi posting past the deadline going to be taken into account?
Created:
Posted in:
'Pussies' was a reference to cats chasing rats and linked also to me just calling them the real rodents. It doesn't violate CoC because the direct interpretation is not truly offensive.
Created:
Posted in:
Entry: Rap/Poem
Beat (not mine but right-click and click Loop for best experience while reading): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9RLEFlqf_0
There is internal rhyming but I decided to not bold it, because it lets you create your own flow to it at points where there's 2-3 ways to flow it.
Everyone in the world, whether a boy or a girl or something in between, a gender yet to unfurl, is full of thoughts and opinions that could go from a sand grain to a pearl,
But if they sit all day talking to no one about it, afraid of the system twisting the truth and peer pressure to shut up and doubt it,
Then of course over time that grain gets quashed, washed away like an abortion non-botched,
So they search forums for a place to discuss shit with some decorum but either it’s full of troll like 4Chan or forcing you to conform to their norm is the chosen breed of problem.
So what in the hell is this website for? Got opinions to sell? Come and have your floor,
This is a place in which debating isn’t taken as a chore,
It’s a haven for the hated views you couldn’t say before,
You express and confess shit and justify it; leave the audience in awe,
Or you realise that you’re wrong with King Kong sized rebuttal that attacks your case at core; leaving it more than just sore,
And honestly that’s what the art is; it’s about remaining impartial,
Despite fighting for a side, in a war you gotta have objectivity; this art is martial,
Your heart can be in the right place but if you don’t wanna lose the conduct mark, then part and parcel of being the greatest is dealing with haters that’ll carve you up for dinner and laugh upon your craft as it goes from top of the planet in a rock to the bottom of Mars, fool,
Coward noobsnipers will bite at your ankles, leave scars ‘n’ you’ll wanna get barbarous, but the real marvel is if you can keep up the debating with haters that really are cruel and not let ‘em get you down, so what if they you’re an idiot? You’re gonna become the Star Fool!
Life isn’t easy, and DART’s no walk in the park, soon after you’re sure you’ll stay at the top, you’re gonna flop and others’ll take you down, this aint a carpool,
You want the top? You can’t stop until you get it,
Don’t sit there happy with your 20-1 record, push farther, rip your competitors apart or they’ll overtake you later and make your Rating blatantly seem like a cartoon,
It aint ‘bout baiting a low-rating kid many times that’s just the foundation, you gotta at some point take out a shark with a harpoon!
It’s simply fate that competition was the theme at the beginning,
‘Cause honestly it seems like very few here were really born for winning,
You’re the type to get thrown in water and flail about drowning while I’m swimming,
So the envious Ramshutu’s go do the very noobsniping they accuse me of, and feign being on a mission,
“Oh I only took ‘em to ensure that RM didn’t,”
Hypocrite at least Oromagi admitted that he was going for more than a Rating pittance,
You were climbing grimey, gloating like a slimeball voting against the GOAT, you rodent,
Y’all calling me ‘ratman’ yeah come chase me pussies, I’m fucking omnipotent,
So you can run around telling tales, but I aint Loki, I’m Odin,
So your whack farces’d better subside as you realise what you think’s hidden to me’s out in the open,
As I said, these waters have sharks, not just minnows, so don’t think that you’ll stay floating,
I’mma rise like surprise motherfuckers, I’m the first to post my talent, worst to have as an opponent.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
You were not the only one to care about that.
You're just the only one to not accept that it's over.
Created:
thing is man, you're not even targetting me right. You're already spreading your hate and stupidity to places like this debate:
I'm gaining allies, you're making enemies.
I'm losing enemies, you're losing allies.
This isn't delusion, in time you'll realise that I was right to ditch that Trello and not ever deal with you in private again. You're going to end up very lonely on this website and without a single real friend left in the game with the attitude you have. You think everyone's a toy unless they're in a position of power but the thing about being a sycophant is that it only lasts so long as both the people in power dig it and as long as no one you mistreated ends up in power or influencing those in power.
I'd say good luck, but we both know I wish you only the worst. Stop fucking with everyone on the site as you please, it's gonna bite you in the ass in the long run.
Created:
If you read my last round I even specifically go into why I didn't have to address every point.
I already know what happens when I cover every base and address every point, you get triggered and call it gish gallop you fake ass banana swish.
Yes, I censored myself so you can't report this.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
Yeah it's called lying. You're lying about what I did. Thanks for your input.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
Bsh1 was focusing on your use of the word 'fuck' where and when you used it in the statement.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I went for a similar angle to you but I felt like the 'competition is corrupt' angle in and of itself would be too ironic as we're in one. I don't get why you think yours was bad, it was good for its angle. Good luck.
I went more for 'competition is neither this nor that' and realised a really funny way to end it that shows you how the 'losers' feel.
Created:
-->
@Harikrish
In Buddhism, Nirvana so actually an endgame like Heaven, named Shambalah.
In Hinduism, Nirvana is more of a joke, like aiming for perfection. You perpetually end up being reincarnated over and over again endlessly because the idea is the better your life, the more likely you are to sin and no soul is infallible.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
No, you didn't
Care to repeat them if you did?
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
It was a great point, well thought out and super incredible.
See how that works? Start explaining.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
We didn't cover anything in 'our' debate. You misrepresented and glossed over having to prove that I was erroneous. You didn't even explain where I went wrong.
The idea that 100 words can't be one sentence is a social construct where people with OCD and simple brains think you need to cut everything you come up with up into sections that are normal sized. I don't care what you think about the debate to be very frank, it made me laugh that you couldn't grasp what I put forth.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
I can't really tell if you're being sarcastic or not.
Created:
I can't report abuse on PM so easily or keep it visible to others here.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Personally I would happily show my debate vs you on the similar topic to anyone I want to impress and am close to, who has interest in the topic.
I genuinely stand by my case and loved my ending strategy of pinning one angle you came at me with against another making your case implode. It's sad the only voter was someone who had malicious intent and couldn't grasp the concepts.
Created:
-->
@PsychometricBrain
I don't get what you're saying. Isn't it a bit insane to not need validation at all?
Like I never get those people who are content being seen as an unimpressive waste of space. Your ego should feel damaged if you're seen that way, in my opinion and I'd never tell anyone differently even as a therapist.
The idea that you should base your confidence entirely on internal validation is something that results in people being unbelievably offputting and antisocially strange.
Created:
-->
@Speedrace
Don't ever feel shame for the losses. You and I are real warriors, with scars and beauty to our style of debate. We risk, we evolve and we impress.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
@omar2345
While you and I are similar people, we differ in the three following ways:
1) You would sooner fight where I would sooner run (yes, I am more cowardly but there's a forte to that too).
2) You see 'waste' in time spent analysing and learning where I see 'waste' in time spent irrationally doing and enacting without careful foresight.
3) You would sooner do the old thing more times, I would sooner explore the new thing at the cost of some resources.
These three things are why you and I will never truly see eye to eye despite all our similarities.
You are definitely the most similar member of this website to me personality-wise.
Created:
When delusion is obvious, it means that either you are deluded, the one you say is deluded is deluded or both are deluded.
Would you like to explore the data and logic behind my worldview and ethics? I can explain why I'm not the deluded one, if you're willing to have the patience to carry this through to the end.
Created:
-->
@DebateArt.com
@David
@bsh1
@Ramshutu
@oromagi
Created: