Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Stick. said:

hmm yeah I haven’t pushed royal nearly as much as I was pushing hyena behind the scenes there 😛 

Yeah, it's not the hardness here that's catching my attention, more the overextension nature of it. But we'll see. I certainly also don't want to do the thing where I paraed you over Raven either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Stick. said:

@RoyalBeeMage hey friend 

 

im currently voting you, do you have anything to say about that? :ph34r:

 

do you wanna put down a vote of your own? 

Edit:

Wdym? :0 

yeah. sorry i was kind of bussy today to i was unable to do anything. umm might just counter vote 

stick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stick. said:

what's the case on archer then

Archer seems Evil 👀

54 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

Honestly no, especially if they don't engage with the argument.

I can see why people might press X to doubt but they would be wrong which is the whole point of my clarifying it.

I mean, that's true psychologically for me. I'll give you an example - in the case you voted me, exed me, and I found out you were just Elims trying to hardpush me, obviously I dgaf then because you just had vested interests which explains the bad reasons. What I'm saying here is: idgaf about how you want to do the entailment. In my head, it's very clear I get fed-up when it's a bad argument. Do I fight all bad arguments? No, because it pisses everyone off and because it takes more to trigger my wanting to be altruistic. You're entitled to feel differently or to just argue I'm deluded about my own psychology (certainly possible), but to me, it's still about the bad arguments.

definitely deluded smh

56 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

I believe that even having to frame the thought in the form of an argument is a first layer check, as is if anyone comes by and engages, as you are clearly doing. If you write the thought and go 'hang on that doesn't work', then clearly you aren't gonna converge. If no one can rebut it, rather than a specific them, then maybe it's not half bad after all. Recall that in this context, the specific 'them' is the person you are disagreeing with.

Yes, but I can't think it out in my head, I need to see it written down (see what I've written earlier), and then the thread is as good a place as the GM PM. Probably better since I might get useful engagement from someone else.

well, if u want to self-check your verdict that ur doing your duty to the village by putting it out into the thread as an argument for such, I shan't stand in the way of that

i still think u probably dont need to worry so much about doing ur duty, i dont think anyone ever was worried about kas not taking his duty to the village seriously enough, but what do i know im an irresponsible person

1 hour ago, Kasimir said:

Honestly that's kind of where I am, at least with regard to my process. It's functionally how journal publishing works these days - no one is ever going to convince Reviewer #2, lbr.

yeah but is this because that's the best way to do it generally or because it's the way that maximizes the yield-to-effort ratio for the reviewers :P

1 hour ago, Kasimir said:

Are you insane.

Dude this is like 500% the point of contemporary analytic philosophy and I'm seriously disturbed you don't think this matters as much as I do :P I think this is significant and I also am really invested in it :P

suppose for the sake of argument that i am insane

1 hour ago, Kasimir said:

But I am concerned with the second point - the whole point of doing it is to facilitate clarity, and clarity facilitates truth-seeking because poorly-defined problems leads to poorly-defined understanding of the situation, i.e. false paths. I'd also add on a pragmatic level I think it's worth clarifying just to be polite. There's a certain level of how much good/bad faith to assume. In which case it's reasonable to go "I will do this much to assume good faith but if you ain't getting there, you ain't." You can argue it's some level of investment in what someone else thinks, but it's also a healthy degree of disinvestment because you are outcome-agnostic enough to not really want to avert the other outcome.

so did you not spot the bit where I said setting the record straight is a means to an ends or did you get tired of reading or what smhhhh

anyways question do you view drifting from the original subject of an argument to be an issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Stick. said:

Wow it is hard to type while driving 

I read this as 'hard to drink while driving' and almost had a caps explosion there :P

13 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

SMH i thought you found my post riveting

ikr smhhhhhh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DrakeMarshall said:

the only reason it doesn't feel like a lot is because there's already 4 pages for some reason :P

...

43 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

or did you get tired of reading or what smhhhh

Yes

 

I have woke up and caught up. Y'all are crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Amanuensis said:

My word isn't good enough? 🫥 But 'tis fine, I'm just the Contact this time so no doc, thank god

Let us know who to go after next cycle, thanks!

3 minutes ago, Amanuensis said:

Anyway back to game content, I'm fine with Kas, Stick, Neil, and Drake for now.

Raven/Archer/Royal thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kasimir said:

Let us know who to go after next cycle, thanks!

Raven/Archer/Royal thoughts?

Archer? Possibly informant, but im not for certain. Stick as an elim continues to terrify me, royal i assume is v just because they are new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...