4 ms·

>That's all there is to it. You can't force everyone else to ignore a glaringly obvious problem because it runs counter to a feel-good narrative. There's a lot

>That's all there is to it. You can't force everyone else to ignore a glaringly obvious problem because it runs counter to a feel-good narrative. There's a lot more that's going on here, don't try to stifle the conversation.

jhall1468 8y ago
That "glaringly obvious problem" is entirely unrelated to the discussion at hand. Burn your straw man elsewhere.
- kadendogthing 8y ago
  >is entirely unrelated to the discussion at hand It is extremely relevant. You can't possibly pretend otherwise. >Burn your straw man elsewhere. Is it that time already? Where we randomly start listing off fallacies?
  - jhall1468 8y ago
    > It is extremely relevant. You can't possibly pretend otherwise. Amazon following tax law and that pissing people off is entirely irrelevant to Amazon donating to charity. That's like saying your height is totally relevant to your favorite food. The only common point is you. > Is it that time already? Where we randomly start listing off fallacies? Yes, changing the subject from charity to Amazon tax dodging (which is absolutely false anyway) isn't a straw man, it's totally coherent conversation that would naturally take if you weren't agenda-driven.
    - kadendogthing 8y ago
      >Amazon following tax law and that pissing people off is entirely irrelevant to Amazon donating to charity A tax system they helped create and perpetuate. So it's not exactly as simple as "following tax law" unless you just want to boil the conversation to irrelevancy. Wait, I think that IS What you're trying to do. >That's like saying your height is totally relevant to your favorite food. No it isn't. Please don't willfully misrepresent someone else's view point just so you can easily defeat it. I think there's a word for that actually... >changing the subject from charity to Amazon tax dodging (which is absolutely false anyway) isn't a straw man No one said they were dodging taxes. Why are you attempting to willfully misrepresent other people's arguments? >agenda-driven. What does this even mean?
      - jhall1468 8y ago
        > Wait, I think that IS What you're trying to do. Yes it is. Because it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You want to start a thread on Amazon dodging taxes, do so and let the community decide if it's a worthy topic. Hijacking a thread that is almost entirely unrelated to the issue you want is why you're getting downvoted. > No it isn't. Please don't willfully misrepresent someone else's view point just so you can easily defeat it. I think there's a word for that actually... You used so many words that have no place in this it's stunning. I didn't misrepresent your views, I didn't even talk about your views, I'm VERY explicitly talking about you bringing up a topic that's entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. > No one said they were dodging taxes. Why are you attempting to willfully misrepresent other people's arguments? Keep using willfully represent over and over and over until people believe it's true. You sound like a politician.

jhall1468 8y ago

That "glaringly obvious problem" is entirely unrelated to the discussion at hand. Burn your straw man elsewhere.

kadendogthing 8y ago
>is entirely unrelated to the discussion at hand It is extremely relevant. You can't possibly pretend otherwise. >Burn your straw man elsewhere. Is it that time already? Where we randomly start listing off fallacies?
- jhall1468 8y ago
  > It is extremely relevant. You can't possibly pretend otherwise. Amazon following tax law and that pissing people off is entirely irrelevant to Amazon donating to charity. That's like saying your height is totally relevant to your favorite food. The only common point is you. > Is it that time already? Where we randomly start listing off fallacies? Yes, changing the subject from charity to Amazon tax dodging (which is absolutely false anyway) isn't a straw man, it's totally coherent conversation that would naturally take if you weren't agenda-driven.
  - kadendogthing 8y ago
    >Amazon following tax law and that pissing people off is entirely irrelevant to Amazon donating to charity A tax system they helped create and perpetuate. So it's not exactly as simple as "following tax law" unless you just want to boil the conversation to irrelevancy. Wait, I think that IS What you're trying to do. >That's like saying your height is totally relevant to your favorite food. No it isn't. Please don't willfully misrepresent someone else's view point just so you can easily defeat it. I think there's a word for that actually... >changing the subject from charity to Amazon tax dodging (which is absolutely false anyway) isn't a straw man No one said they were dodging taxes. Why are you attempting to willfully misrepresent other people's arguments? >agenda-driven. What does this even mean?
    - jhall1468 8y ago
      > Wait, I think that IS What you're trying to do. Yes it is. Because it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You want to start a thread on Amazon dodging taxes, do so and let the community decide if it's a worthy topic. Hijacking a thread that is almost entirely unrelated to the issue you want is why you're getting downvoted. > No it isn't. Please don't willfully misrepresent someone else's view point just so you can easily defeat it. I think there's a word for that actually... You used so many words that have no place in this it's stunning. I didn't misrepresent your views, I didn't even talk about your views, I'm VERY explicitly talking about you bringing up a topic that's entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. > No one said they were dodging taxes. Why are you attempting to willfully misrepresent other people's arguments? Keep using willfully represent over and over and over until people believe it's true. You sound like a politician.