You cannot keep on ignoring the explanation and insisting the contrary

that is not the fuckin topic anymore

if anyone is strawmaning now it is you

...

its something which is crucial to whether or not me and you should have a debate at all

now move onto the main fekkin argument

If you truly wanted to argue you’d concede that I actually admitted I made a mistake

If your ego is SO big that you cant concede a minor point, continuing talking to you is useless, since if i do refute your thesis, you wont concede since that would be major, and admitting major mistakes is MUCH harder than admitting minor mistakes

No you indirectly shrugged it off

then you ridiculed it by "ironically" admitting it

when?

again you want me to be like “Sorry sir. I strawmanned you. I apologize to you. Please don’t take this personally”

Is that what you want

No. I simply want you admitting that you strawmaned me directly

No dick sucking, nothing

Just an admission

i already did

Because “if I can’t concede something this minor, how can you expect me to concede something major”

Do you not read what I say?
"I simply want you admitting that you strawmaned me **directly** "

You indirectly shrugged it off

because i want to move on with the debate

but does it invalidate my point

Does it invalidate any argument

you know to the thing we are actually here for

did a fallacy made in an online debate really irk you so much you pushed it for over 20 minutes

me big brian cause I use big words and call literally everything strawmanning

It's purpose isn't to invalidate your argument. The purpose of this is to establish for me whether or not you actually seek truth, or whether or not you engage a debate with a high ego, who's only intention is to dunk on someone
If its the latter, then that would explain why its taking you 30 fucking minutes to admitting a MINOR mistake. Why would i assume you will concede an argument if i point out a major contradiction, if you cant admit a minor error

LMAO

> It's purpose isn't to invalidate your argument. The purpose of this is to establish for me whether or not you actually seek truth, or whether or not you engage a debate with a high ego, who's only intention is to dunk on someone
> If its the latter, then that would explain why its taking you 30 fucking minutes to admitting a MINOR mistake. Why would i assume you will concede an argument if i point out a major contradiction, if you cant admit a minor error
@Sentient23

Yikes

Thank you SO much for proving my point right now

I'm so glad i actually thought of this the other day as a mechanism to establish whether someone's genuine or not

Its working

Thanks for proving my point

Adios

You don’t get anywhere in life if you push people for something that is irrelevant to the main topic at hand

🤡

Is this your tactic? Just repeat the conclusion of what you believe in without addressing my explanation as to why that conclusion is wrong? I explained how its relevant to ALL conversations me an you have, because if you are genuine, you wont have a problem with conceding a minor error, if you do have a problem with conceding a minor error, it means you have a big ego, if you have a big ego and its taking you 30 minutes to admit a minor error, then that's an indicator its going to take you MUCH LONGER to concede a major error when your argument gets refuted

Holy shit

why do acting because i made many mistakes