You are really sad, you know that?
First, you misquoted the arbitrary "rule" that should read: "whoever resorts to insults has lost the argument". You thought it should be "whoever uses insults loses the argument". And you still don't grasp the difference.
Second, as "justification" for that alleged rule, you said Robert's Rules of Order. That's it - a sentence fragment. You didn't even link to it or anything. In my initial ignorance, I accepted that it contained the rule you quoted, and I asked you to post it verbatim. When you refused to do so, I had to look it up and I discovered that it's about CONGRESS! It's not about debate, you ninny. There is a tiny section about debate in it, but it never mentions the rule you quoted. And yet you still seem to think that it is pertinent.
Third, you are an idiot. If that is the thrust of the argument, it is impossible to consider it an insult - it is merely up to you to disprove it. For my part, I've proven it well enough already.
In your first scenario, you said that person A committed the crime AND that he didn't commit the crime. This merely serves to reinforce my third point above. Idiot. ;-) |
