Intelligence_06's avatar

Intelligence_06

A member since
4
8
11

Statistics

Debates
108
Won
80
Lost
19
Tied
9
Win ratio
78.24%
Rating
1,807
Debate votes
134
Debate comments
1,201
Forum topics
97
Forum posts
3,083

Personal information

Gender
Male
Birthday
Country
China
Native language
Chinese
Education
High school
Life's priority
Unknown
Religion
Unknown
Political ideology
Socialism
Occupation
Student
Income
$20,000 or less

About me

My motto, which has been generated from a random quote generator: "Going insane strengthens an open mind."

Unlike some who preach Wikipedia, I preach Merriam-Webster.

My beliefs:

-I believe in the separation between the account and the IRL person. This is why doxxing is bad here. Accounts should be treated as a projection of the person using it, not the person itself. The account could say anything the person does not believe in, and that is perfectly OK and logically non-contradictory.

-It is a debating site, not a campfire-talking site: well, the main selling point here is the debates, not the forums anyways.

-If you try to be honest, then don't expect to leave without your ass beat unless you are really strong. I will try everything within my capability to win, even if that means dirty tricks, semantic maneuvers and absurd worldviews(If needed, I WILL justify racism and sexism, although it was never needed, and I wish it would stay that way forever).

-Any strategy, no matter how dirty it is, should be able to be deployed in order to win, as long as it does not damage your long-run benefit(for example, doxxing, hacking and violating the CoC ultimately gets you banned, which decreases the amount of points you can gain for the short term, which is undesirable).

-If the statements presented by the opposing side benefits you without them knowing, then you should agree with them even if that is a sacrilegious behavior(And if you REALLY love your religion that much, then losing debates is not a big deal I guess then). I am not religious.

-The purest understanding of a debating topic is through grammatics and semantics, since topics are presented through words, not abstract ideas through clarivoyance. Commonplace scenarios worth nothing unless they are in the presumption. Failure of definition is one of the biggest L's you can have as an instigator, unless you can somehow make up for it.

-The evidence is a lie, there is only structure.

Unless you come up with a wording precise enough, I will keep avoiding the problem. You can block me if you hate it.