So what

I ended the conversation, ohhh nooo

Yeah so what, right? So what. Hmm maybe so you have no leg to stand on when saying he came back to insult you

He also came to the same conclusion yesterday that I came to today
https://gyazo.com/f4cbefcc003db19c625eea8e79559408

Both independently from one another, coincidence?

He didn't "insult" me and couldn't possibly. He made an ad hom, I didn't make an ad hom, I insulted him and ended a conversation. These aren't the same thing at all.

Phadreus is screeching again? What a shock.

You should learn the difference between being right and arguing well

Do I need to talk in small words to help you understand how fallacies work? I can do that if you're having a hard time. @ETBrooD

How tf is that an argument for anything

<:WaitWhatArmy:590858815189024778>

Make your argument, don't talk big words about fallacies. I know fallacies, too. You're not the exceptional 1 million IQ person here

If you "know fallacies" then why would you bring up *insults* when I pointed out that Hex started a conversation with a **ad hom?**

"big words about fallacies" dude, what? I don't even consider knowledge of fallacies to be a big deal, they're literally just basic rules for debate to avoid blatantly illogical strategies. If that's too "big brained" for you then maybe you should stop trying to have arguments with people until you hit the boks a little.

@ETBrooD

You brought up insults, not me

I literally couldn't care less about being insulted in an argument and never said anything about insults. At all. I mentioned the ***fallacy*** that hex opened his argument with.

@ETBrooD No I didn't

is this the real life, is this just fallacy

Quote me

I'm not even going to go look myself

I said "personal attack" at one point but that's in reference to ad hom, not insult

Right, my bad. You didn't "bring up" insults. In fact it's worse, you're the only one who did any insulting at all. All towards Hex.

<:WaitWhatArmy:590858815189024778>

And I have no clue what warrants insulting him, he simply argued with you.

https://gyazo.com/4c62a7d40ce091f56fce1b695cb248d1

He didn't troll you, he didn't insult you, he didn't attack you in any way. You lashed out multiple times against him when you got frustrated with his argumentation.

Supporting my point?

No, I got frustrated with his ***inability to argue*** not his supposed "argumentation". <:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>

And also, no, I was simply going to point out that what you're construing as an insult was literally just me making an observation and ending the conversation. I guess because me acknowledging reality hurts your butthole that there's a problem though??

One man's inability to argue is another man's argumentation.

You can call it whatever you want, if you think being right equates to arguing well then you have a lot to learn.

@ETBrooD Considering this has ***quite literally*** just devolved into you pretending to be virtuous while trying to attack my character, and considering we're not even having an actual argument outside of this extended fart snuffing ad hom of yours, I'm going to make the same observation again; you're too obnoxious for me to continue talking to and I have better things to do.

Also,

> One man's inability to argue is another man's argumentation.

Doesn't mean I have to participate

> You can call it whatever you want, if you think being right equates to arguing well then you have a lot to learn.

You have yet to show me where I've "argued badly". How about you show me which fallacies I committed? Bet you can't, because in reality I'm perfectly good at arguing and you're just a fart-huffing asshole who dropped in to *attempt* at attacking my character for no reason other than that you believe yourself to be a good person.

"MUHHHH VIRTUEEEEE WAAAAA"

I'm not trying to be virtuous, I just saw you arguing very poorly and I'm pointing it out.

The two of us have had an argument before, too, if you remember. And that time it went similarly, where I demonstrated that your numbers were highly unrealistic and you had absolutely no rebuttal to offer, you just got angry.

That's why I seem to be "attacking your character". Yeah if someone has a pattern of behavior, I point it out.

You posted a quote from Nietzsche that was misunderstood as being your own argument. Then you tried to mock Hex for not noticing that it's not your own personal take but a quote.

I'd agree with Hex that it can easily be overlooked that it was a quote.

You made such a big deal out of that little mistake, instead of arguing honestly and just acknowledging that this sort of oversight can happen to someone.

Like, I once made a similar mistake and had a bit of a fight with Ford over what I thought he had said. I acknowledged my mistake, we got over it. Mistakes happen.

> The two of us have had an argument before, too, if you remember. And that time it went similarly, where I demonstrated that your numbers were highly unrealistic and you had absolutely no rebuttal to offer, you just got angry.
@ETBrooD I don't remember you really, tbh. Was it about the coronavirus? I do get pissed off at "flu bros" due to how ***dangerous and despicable*** denialism surrounding this situation obviously is.

Also, if it was based on my rundown of the coronavirus figures, no those numbers aren't unrealistic at all and it's very likely that I didn't make a rebuttal because none was required. Here's the post again if you'd like to review:

> I'm not trying to be virtuous, I just saw you arguing very poorly and I'm pointing it out.
@ETBrooD <:hyperdoubt:657356297553051728>

Give am example of my alleged "poor argumentation"

You made a claim about closed border stopping the virus after the virus had already entered the country