6 ms·

> What you are doing is being hyper-pedantic. It is fucking tiresome when people do this online. That's not pedantry. There's a huge difference between "they

by kelnos 7mo ago

> What you are doing is being hyper-pedantic. It is fucking tiresome when people do this online. That's not pedantry. There's a huge difference between "they were unavailable and I couldn't get one at any price" and "I could have bought one from a scalper but I didn't trust them". Even if it's reasonable not to trust them (it is!), the first statement is sensational, and untrue, especially considering you emphasized "at any price" in your comment upthread. > If you are going to be a smart arse, I will modify my statement to say "I could not get a card from a reputable online store as they were all out of stock and did not wish to risk buying from a less reputable one". That's what you should have said in the first place; that would have been honest and correct. And please, there's no need to call the other poster names. That's uncalled-for and childish. You seem to be new here (9-day-old account), so please read the site guidelines and turn it down a notch or three.

JollySharp0 7mo ago
> That's not pedantry. There's a huge difference between "they were simply unavailable and I couldn't get one at any price" and "I could have bought one from a scalper but I didn't trust them". Even if it's reasonable not to trust them (it is!), the first statement is sensational, and untrue, especially considering you emphasized "at any price" in your original comment. It is for any normal person in relatively normal setting. Only amongst technical people is this sort of discourse tolerated where someone pretends that an unreasonable option (the scalper in this case as you admitted yourself) should be included in a statement when it is perfectly obvious it should not be included because it is not in any way reasonable. I could have flown to the US and bought a card or China. Is that reasonable? For most people it isn't reasonable. It wasn't for me. Buying from an untrustworthy seller, is unreasonable. > the first statement is sensational, and untrue, especially considering you emphasized "at any price" in your original comment. They were out of stock on every reputable site. Therefore I could not buy a card at any price from them because they didn't exist. > That's what you should have said in the first place; that would have been honest and correct. I was honest and correct to begin with. The poster was using prices and availability in the US and not the UK. > And please, there's no need to call the other poster names. I never called them names. I expressed my annoyance at their behaviour.
- Dylan16807 7mo ago
  > It is for any normal person in relatively normal setting. A normal person understands scalping and that if they want it badly enough they can go on ebay. They're not going to say it's "unavailable at any price" when it's right there for double the price. If you're willing to pay the scalped price, the risk of using ebay is not in fact unreasonable.
  - JollySharp0 7mo ago
    You are being a pendant as far as I am concerned and arguing semantics with me is not going to convince me and many others. So I suggest in future you should learn that using this line of logic (where you expect me to do something unreasonable to a huge number of people) is not something that people are going to put up with. It is really annoying to have to converse in this manner and in fact I believe that often that is wholly disingenuous and I no longer wish to speak to you.
    - Dylan16807 7mo ago
      If I categorized these situations the way you do, and I said what I'm saying, I would be a pedant. But I see things a different way. The logic I'm actually using is not pedantic. You calling me disingenuous over this is painful to look at. Get out of your own head for a second. We're using different premises, and we're reaching different conclusions because of that. My logic is fine, and your logic is fine.
      - JollySharp0 7mo ago
        > If I categorized these situations the way you do, and I said what I'm saying, I would be a pedant. I am not categorising any situation. The vast majority of people would omit unreasonable options. I could buy a racing bike that is £5000 new, for £200 when I live in London (back in 2000s). The bike would most likely would have been stolen. So technically I can buy a £5000 bike for £200. But most people wouldn't want to buy from a thief and consider it unethical. People feel similarly about scalpers and other untrustworthy sellers. > You calling me disingenuous over this is painful to look at. Get out of your own head for a second. You started the conversation claiming I was outright lying. Then when I clarified to you what I meant you continued claiming I was lying/misstating. That is really annoying. If you could have just said "okay that is fair, while you might have been doing X and Y, I can understand why you didn't want to do that". That would have been fine. But that didn't happen.

by kelnos 7mo ago

JollySharp0 7mo ago

> That's not pedantry. There's a huge difference between "they were simply unavailable and I couldn't get one at any price" and "I could have bought one from a scalper but I didn't trust them". Even if it's reasonable not to trust them (it is!), the first statement is sensational, and untrue, especially considering you emphasized "at any price" in your original comment. It is for any normal person in relatively normal setting. Only amongst technical people is this sort of discourse tolerated where someone pretends that an unreasonable option (the scalper in this case as you admitted yourself) should be included in a statement when it is perfectly obvious it should not be included because it is not in any way reasonable. I could have flown to the US and bought a card or China. Is that reasonable? For most people it isn't reasonable. It wasn't for me. Buying from an untrustworthy seller, is unreasonable. > the first statement is sensational, and untrue, especially considering you emphasized "at any price" in your original comment. They were out of stock on every reputable site. Therefore I could not buy a card at any price from them because they didn't exist. > That's what you should have said in the first place; that would have been honest and correct. I was honest and correct to begin with. The poster was using prices and availability in the US and not the UK. > And please, there's no need to call the other poster names. I never called them names. I expressed my annoyance at their behaviour.

Dylan16807 7mo ago
> It is for any normal person in relatively normal setting. A normal person understands scalping and that if they want it badly enough they can go on ebay. They're not going to say it's "unavailable at any price" when it's right there for double the price. If you're willing to pay the scalped price, the risk of using ebay is not in fact unreasonable.
- JollySharp0 7mo ago
  You are being a pendant as far as I am concerned and arguing semantics with me is not going to convince me and many others. So I suggest in future you should learn that using this line of logic (where you expect me to do something unreasonable to a huge number of people) is not something that people are going to put up with. It is really annoying to have to converse in this manner and in fact I believe that often that is wholly disingenuous and I no longer wish to speak to you.
  - Dylan16807 7mo ago
    If I categorized these situations the way you do, and I said what I'm saying, I would be a pedant. But I see things a different way. The logic I'm actually using is not pedantic. You calling me disingenuous over this is painful to look at. Get out of your own head for a second. We're using different premises, and we're reaching different conclusions because of that. My logic is fine, and your logic is fine.
    - JollySharp0 7mo ago
      > If I categorized these situations the way you do, and I said what I'm saying, I would be a pedant. I am not categorising any situation. The vast majority of people would omit unreasonable options. I could buy a racing bike that is £5000 new, for £200 when I live in London (back in 2000s). The bike would most likely would have been stolen. So technically I can buy a £5000 bike for £200. But most people wouldn't want to buy from a thief and consider it unethical. People feel similarly about scalpers and other untrustworthy sellers. > You calling me disingenuous over this is painful to look at. Get out of your own head for a second. You started the conversation claiming I was outright lying. Then when I clarified to you what I meant you continued claiming I was lying/misstating. That is really annoying. If you could have just said "okay that is fair, while you might have been doing X and Y, I can understand why you didn't want to do that". That would have been fine. But that didn't happen.