View Single Post
Old 02-19-2013, 04:09 PM   #225
Ninjalawyer
Guru
Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Ninjalawyer's Avatar
 
Posts: 749
Karma: 17465308
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Canada
Device: Kobo Touch, Nexus 7 (2013)
Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin View Post
He's arguing with something nobody actually said. Again.

My premise was that it's possible for someone to reasonably view lookie-loos as being unethical. His response, consistently, has been that I'm wrong because it's possible for such behavior to not be unethical. There is no connection between the two statements. I never said it wasn't possible for it to not be unethical. He's never actually denied that it's possible for it to be unethical.

He's simply not responding to what I said. He's arguing with what he apparently wishes I'd said instead.
Ah, I see the source of your confusion and I think I can help.

I (mistakenly it seems) thought our discussion was over. You expressed your opinion, I expressed mine, you then suggested I was too stupid to follow your points, at which point I posted a (fairly hilarious, IMHO) picture of Emperor Palpatine. I guess I just assumed that we'd have to agree to disagree about the issue, and whether or not I have the basic reading comprehension skills necessary to follow your points.

The poste above that you responded to with an accusation about a strawman argument was in response to theinfamousj, not to you. I thought that was fairly clear from quoting theinfamousj's post, but that's always easy to miss when you've worked up a full head of steam.

As a bonus apology, I'm sorry you took my accurate quote of yours as a dig against your spelling. In future, I will avoid using "sic" in quoted text, and will bear full responsibility for any and all misspellings in the quote; it's a heavy burden to bear, but I bear it cheerfully to help maintain MobileRead's atmosphere of camaraderie.

As even more compensation to you, I've purposely placed two typos in this post! You may quote those with a "sic" if you wish; I am at your mercy on this one.

Last edited by Ninjalawyer; 02-19-2013 at 04:19 PM.
Ninjalawyer is offline   Reply With Quote