Kubra wrote:Dodge as you like, but it doesn't make your case better, does it? Really, your entire position is predicated on a refusal to speak, which of course as a fellow adherent of the shapiro school of rhetoric I cannot argue with it. it is surely *logically* airtight, mostly for the lack of air.
I did? Well, I know I'm a broken record at this point, but you really should demonstrate such, instead of simply declaring "you're wrong". As an imminently logical fellow, like you, I can of course see the myriad of problems with such an approach.
It's not a dodge? I'm saying this isn't how conversations work. You don't point to someone and say "explain the history of thing."I deny you have any right to quiz me, I require you to lick my boots before I will grant you such a privilege. I am standing firmly in place saying fuck your premise.
You made a series of unsupported statements, I said no because they were unsupported you then requested I support the case your statements were unsupported. You haven't had a coherent argument in like two pages. The last actual point you tried to make is that probable nosepicker Malatesta was cool with describing things as anarchy when they're not which is not a point it's a factoid.