3 ms·

1) You told me I don't know the whole story, so I took your advice 2) When I find the truth, you say I am saying its the partial truth. So basically, what I a

1) You told me I don't know the whole story, so I took your advice 2) When I find the truth, you say I am saying its the partial truth. So basically, what I am getting, is that you are right because you said so. > you intend to misinform and mislead You made an accusation and I refuted it. The person misleading others is not me as I like you to recall that you are the one accusing Hong Kong of "starting it". Please provide some evidence to back your claim instead of just saying you are Chinese (I am assuming not from Hong Kong). That means absolutely nothing in the context of the argument.

UIZealot 7y ago
> You made an accusation and I refuted it. You did nothing of the sort. That incident was not even relevant here, it specifically did not start the name calling from either side. Again, partial truth. You clearly know next to nothing about the situation. Again, please refrain from jumping to conclusions and spreading partial truth, unless you intend to misinform and mislead. The whole story is out there if you care to find it. But you are not really interested in the whole story, are you?
- temprarysud3 7y ago
  I am sorry, but this is getting tedious.. > That incident was not even relevant here It is 100% relevant. > That incident was not even relevant here, it specifically did not start the name calling from either side. So where's your proof? Again, you are saying the same thing as your last, which is, I know better because I am Chinese. > You clearly know next to nothing about the situation. Ad hominem > unless you intend to misinform and mislead Accusation with no proof. Just name calling. Let's end this argument, because it clearly is going nowhere.
  - UIZealot 7y ago
    > So where's your proof? Again, you are saying the same thing as your last, which is, I know better because I am Chinese. As compared to you who's not even close to being familiar with the situation, who managed to read a whole Wikipedia article on the subject? You bet! > Ad hominem Ooh, fancy, I don't know what that means, you win that one there, automatically! >> unless you intend to misinform and mislead >Accusation with no proof. Just name calling. Oops! Misquotation fail. You left the "unless" in there this time, which made it clear I wasn't making an accusation.

UIZealot 7y ago

> You made an accusation and I refuted it. You did nothing of the sort. That incident was not even relevant here, it specifically did not start the name calling from either side. Again, partial truth. You clearly know next to nothing about the situation. Again, please refrain from jumping to conclusions and spreading partial truth, unless you intend to misinform and mislead. The whole story is out there if you care to find it. But you are not really interested in the whole story, are you?

temprarysud3 7y ago
I am sorry, but this is getting tedious.. > That incident was not even relevant here It is 100% relevant. > That incident was not even relevant here, it specifically did not start the name calling from either side. So where's your proof? Again, you are saying the same thing as your last, which is, I know better because I am Chinese. > You clearly know next to nothing about the situation. Ad hominem > unless you intend to misinform and mislead Accusation with no proof. Just name calling. Let's end this argument, because it clearly is going nowhere.
- UIZealot 7y ago
  > So where's your proof? Again, you are saying the same thing as your last, which is, I know better because I am Chinese. As compared to you who's not even close to being familiar with the situation, who managed to read a whole Wikipedia article on the subject? You bet! > Ad hominem Ooh, fancy, I don't know what that means, you win that one there, automatically! >> unless you intend to misinform and mislead >Accusation with no proof. Just name calling. Oops! Misquotation fail. You left the "unless" in there this time, which made it clear I wasn't making an accusation.