Oh I’ve made points, you’ve just been ignoring them, causing me to have to repeat myself to make my point.
lol. No one said you didn’t make a point. And I certainly did not ignore them. Only that you dedicated far more of your post to whining about post length.
I want intellectually honest conversations with real human beings.
I can see from some of your other responses in here, including to me, that this is your go-to. It’s nothing more than an empty ad hominem to avoid actually addressing points. Sorry.
I can see from some of your other responses in here, including to me, that this is your go-to. It’s nothing more than an empty ad hominem to avoid actually addressing points. Sorry.
You are dancing around like crazy. Every point I bring up, instead of you discussing it, you move on to something else about me, trying to kill the messenger.
If you’re being intellectually honest, and if you actually have read some of my other posts, you’d see it’s definitely not an ad hominem, it’s actually what I believe in, so I express it often.
I hate shills and bots, and corporations trying to redirect the narrative away from the truth to serve their own selfish needs, polluting the conversation.
And when I see shills doing that, by signaling via some of their tells, I call them on it.
Every point I bring up, instead of you discussing it,
Name the point I ignored. I’m happy to address the point.
If you’re being intellectually honest, and if you actually have read some of my other posts, you’d see it’s definitely not an ad hominem, it’s actually what I believe in, so I express it often.
Whether you believe it or not doesn’t change the fact that it’s, quite literally, an ad hominem. You might not realize it and it’s just a defense mechanism to avoid facing the fact that you can’t really defend your position. But it still is exactly that.
And when I see shills doing that, by signaling via some of their tells, I call them on it.
Correction: when you can’t actually defend your position, you just throw that out so you don’t actually have to defend your position.
Name the point I ignored. I’m happy to address the point.
Honestly, at this point, I’d have to just point you back up to my first reply to your comment. You’ve moved the goalposts several times from when we started discussing WFH for employees (and not companies).
You are using multiple argumentative techniques to not have to concede a point, and not being intellectually honest in this conversation. We’ve drifted FAR away from the original topic of WFH.
At this point, I’d rather not waste any more of my time on this, but just instead point you back to our first comments and have you take a look at the like/dislike ratios, they are telling (though I’m sure you’re ignore/excuse those away as well).
Honestly, at this point, I’d have to just point you back up to my first reply to your comment. You’ve moved the goalposts several times from when we started discussing WFH for employees (and not companies).
When given an opportunity to make your point, you offer up nothing but vagueness. You see what you hate in yourself in me, but I assure you you are really just seeing yourself.
lol. No one said you didn’t make a point. And I certainly did not ignore them. Only that you dedicated far more of your post to whining about post length.
I can see from some of your other responses in here, including to me, that this is your go-to. It’s nothing more than an empty ad hominem to avoid actually addressing points. Sorry.
You are dancing around like crazy. Every point I bring up, instead of you discussing it, you move on to something else about me, trying to kill the messenger.
If you’re being intellectually honest, and if you actually have read some of my other posts, you’d see it’s definitely not an ad hominem, it’s actually what I believe in, so I express it often.
I hate shills and bots, and corporations trying to redirect the narrative away from the truth to serve their own selfish needs, polluting the conversation.
And when I see shills doing that, by signaling via some of their tells, I call them on it.
Name the point I ignored. I’m happy to address the point.
Whether you believe it or not doesn’t change the fact that it’s, quite literally, an ad hominem. You might not realize it and it’s just a defense mechanism to avoid facing the fact that you can’t really defend your position. But it still is exactly that.
Correction: when you can’t actually defend your position, you just throw that out so you don’t actually have to defend your position.
Honestly, at this point, I’d have to just point you back up to my first reply to your comment. You’ve moved the goalposts several times from when we started discussing WFH for employees (and not companies).
You are using multiple argumentative techniques to not have to concede a point, and not being intellectually honest in this conversation. We’ve drifted FAR away from the original topic of WFH.
At this point, I’d rather not waste any more of my time on this, but just instead point you back to our first comments and have you take a look at the like/dislike ratios, they are telling (though I’m sure you’re ignore/excuse those away as well).
When given an opportunity to make your point, you offer up nothing but vagueness. You see what you hate in yourself in me, but I assure you you are really just seeing yourself.
Also lol @ “like ratios” proving correctness.
Lol!
Whatever lets you sleep at night. Have a good day.