3 ms·
Now you're being ridiculous. I'm disappointed. The context of those phrases, which you removed, made it clear enough that the first phrase referred to mine rol
by _djo_ 14y ago
Now you're being ridiculous. I'm disappointed.
The context of those phrases, which you removed, made it clear enough that the first phrase referred to mine rolling as part of a system of complementary techniques while the second referred to it as a technique used on its own.
By intentionally removing that context so as to attempt to prove the phrases contradictory, you've proven only that you're more interesting in trolling than in debating this seriously. So I see no point in continuing this conversation.
- pbhjpbhj 14y ago>you've proven only that you're more interesting in trolling than in debating this seriously // The point was that you started by saying the thing was useless and persisted to try and defend that point despite acceding that similar devices are used and useful. There was nothing to debate, I simply called you on over-exaggeration and you refuse to accept it is. Fair enough you clearly know more about the domain in question. But the information you've given is the counterpoint to your initial claim. The reason I quoted without the full context was because that indicated your initial argument. The extended quote was how you adapted your argument against the claim that you were wrongly portraying the true position.