2455
2456

/r/allAvoiding xenophobic sentiments (imgur.com)

Dzappo が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Blakred 1095ポイント1096ポイント  (23子コメント)

Right, that makes my point completely invalid, but doesn't change the fact I'd like to be right

[–]drilldrive -70ポイント-69ポイント  (22子コメント)

I would argue that the second paragraph is still intact, as that one has a different point entirely. That paragraph was just noting how some of the upper class buy the items that they feel are foreign over the standard ones.

Edit: Perhaps I should have explained myself better, as I am not the best at conveying my point. I was just trying to discuss how the original poster had two main points in his post, and how nullifying the first one didn't quite ruin the second point. I would also like to point out that I don't quite agree with his arguments; I am just trying to avoid jumping to conclusions. If I am missing something here then let me know what it is, but for now I am standing by my main post.

[–]Dookieboot 1ポイント2ポイント  (21子コメント)

Shouldve known better than to use logic....

[–]DrProbably -5ポイント-4ポイント  (20子コメント)

Yeah that shit doesn't fly around here. Anyone seen pissing in the popcorn is downvoted. Kinda turns this sub into a haven for the intellectually lazy sometimes.

[–]Neezzyy 3ポイント4ポイント  (19子コメント)

Uhhm his second point depends entirely on what he was trying to demonstrate in the first. Once that goes to shit, he has no evidence of the second so it falls apart too.

You guys just wanted to anti-circlejerk so hard you just agreed with him without reading the original comment. The poster you're defending even took his comment back and said "yeah you're right, never mind the above post" 2 hours before you commented. If you're gonna complain about people being intellectually lazy, perhaps start with yourself

[–]DrProbably -3ポイント-2ポイント  (18子コメント)

I was speaking more to the attitude of the sub in general. Just because a single example falls flat that doesn't disprove the nature of the sub overall.

[–]Neezzyy 2ポイント3ポイント  (17子コメント)

Just because a single example falls flat that doesn't disprove the nature of the sub overall.

When it's the only example youre using to prove your point then you're providing zero evidence to suppport your claim.

What's funny is youre acting exactly the same way that the OP did and is being derided for. He uses an example to prove a point, someone disproves that and he still insists he's correct despite providing zero evidence other than his unfounded belief. It's so uncanny i feel like i got trolled now.

[–]DrProbably -3ポイント-2ポイント  (16子コメント)

Are you really conflating the origin of a word and the attitude of a sub as being equally static and measurable?

There needs to be a sub that highlights the extreme cherry picking and disengenuous bullshit present in a lot of comments. Something like /r/IknowyourenotTHATdense or something.

[–]Neezzyy 0ポイント1ポイント  (15子コメント)

Are you really conflating the origin of a word and the attitude of a sub as being equally static and measurable?

No.

The dude you were agreeing with was suggesting /u/drilldrive got downvoted regardless of being correct and logical. You agree with him, saying it's par for the course. You can't agree with him unless you think /u/drilldrive is correct. He was not. He even admitted he was incorrect 2 hours before you commented.

So your only reason to agree with the sentiment of this sub being trigger happy with downvotes and ignoring logic has fallen apart and youre still claiming that the sentiment is still true. Just like OP we're making fun of.

I disagree that this sub just downvotes anyone without reading and applying logic. You have provided no evidence or proof to back up your claim. Just like OP. I think that's humorous.

[–]Sturgeon_Genital 1ポイント2ポイント  (9子コメント)

Jesus Christ, do you realize that you have now descended into verysmartdom yourselves?

[–]DrProbably -3ポイント-2ポイント  (4子コメント)

So if there was a report of a rape, and I said "rapists are awful" and then the original rape report was false, I'm somehow made wrong by this?

k