Logical Fallacies

[Chris.Roth]

Trying to temper your dissatisfaction with a dose of reality. SC2 cheese wins games, they may be shamed by fellow players, but it -is- a 1 in the "w" collumn, isn't it. Why do you play? Personally, I play to win. If you have a disagreement, if you want to explore a topic, a publicized debate is most likely not the appropriate forum. That's my point.

You're expressing anger at gamers for gaming a game. Again, I understand, but it is to be expected..now isn't it?

My point is simple. The gamers are shamed. The debator, Galloway, is given defense from the most intelligent forum I can find. (this one.) Are you defending fallacies? Is winning an audience of 500 people more important than expressing the truth? After all, religion has "won" for years, haven't they? And yet, most on this site would agree religion is inherently evil. Do the ends justify the means? does the win justify giving a stupid argument to stupid people? I get your point about "winning". However, it's not as simple as that for me. We have two options. A: allow it to continue and chalk it up to winning, or B: Shame idiots for being idiots. You've watched the debate, I want your honest opinion of whether Galloway genuinely made a good argument? Like I said, he didn't even get a winning vote from this. So what was the point in being a moron? Perhaps we're speaking two differnent languages of reason here, and that's why I'm pushing my point so hard. By all means, enlighten me.

---

Trying to temper your dissatisfaction with a dose of reality. SC2 cheese wins games, they may be shamed by fellow players, but it -is- a 1 in the "w" collumn, isn't it. Why do you play? Personally, I play to win. If you have a disagreement, if you want to explore a topic, a publicized debate is most likely not the appropriate forum. That's my point.

You're expressing anger at gamers for gaming a game. Again, I understand, but it is to be expected..now isn't it?

And second of all, when can we 1v1 in SC2? I know you play, I KNOW it. haha.