|
 |
On 2-5-2010 21:39, Warp wrote:
> andrel <byt### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>> Always one of the highlights of a discussion: the returning an argument.
>> Anyway, your premise is false hence nothing follows.
>
>> BTW: I know you are familiar with the technical term for wrongly
>> paraphrasing an opponents point of view and attacking that paraphrase. I
>> also know you rather frequently accuse others of it, so why do you do it
>> yourself? IMWTK
>
> Your meta-argumentation and condescending attitude is quite effetively
> irritating, so I suppose the best thing for me to do is to simply ignore it.
Possibly because I was irritated ;) It is going better now, thanks.
Anyway, the IMWTK was there on purpose. I assume you read what you
write, that you think before you do, and that you think about how you
are going to make a point, using what rhetorical techniques.
If you do all that, how did it slip through? Or was it deliberate?
Or to put it shorter: a simple sorry would have sufficed.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
