Don't increase post count in Welcome forum

[Sammeth.]

I wasn't defending any point, I was stating you shouldn't say something is fact when it isn't. I do happen to agree that removing the post count increase would be pointless, but its just the principle of saying something is fact when it isn't. Thats the point I was trying to get across.

[Black_Apalachi]

Oh right, so you were just being pedantic for the sake of it regardless of the thread topic. And I got a -rep because of it. Cheers (Y)

[Sammeth.]

Oh right, so you were just being pedantic for the sake of it regardless of the thread topic. And I got a -rep because of it. Cheers (Y)

No I wasn't being pedantic, I was pointing out a flaw in his post which is what this whole thread is based on. If its going to be a proper debate, it may as well be done properly. It was on the topic of the thread. Getting -rep is clearly my fault and not your own for not reading properly :S

[FlyingJesus]

He wasn't being pedantic, it's extremely bad form to state something as fact when it is isn't, especially in a discussion that deals with changes and how they might affect things. If you think that sort of thing is fine then here's a FACT*: you not being a part of this discussion would make it far more intelligent and beneficial in outcome.


*Not a fact but let's ignore that huh, after all it'd be pedantic to quibble

[hah]

i cantbelieve all this is really about weather or not peoples posts count increase in welcome forums or not

[Black_Apalachi]

No I wasn't being pedantic, I was pointing out a flaw in his post which is what this whole thread is based on. If its going to be a proper debate, it may as well be done properly. It was on the topic of the thread. Getting -rep is clearly my fault and not your own for not reading properly :S

The whole point is that I did read the previous posts which is what led me to believe you were challenging Dan's post in favour of the opposing statement which had been made previously in the thread. The point is, it is a fact that you can't make people post anywhere.

He wasn't being pedantic, it's extremely bad form to state something as fact when it is isn't, especially in a discussion that deals with changes and how they might affect things. If you think that sort of thing is fine then here's a FACT*: you not being a part of this discussion would make it far more intelligent and beneficial in outcome.


*Not a fact but let's ignore that huh, after all it'd be pedantic to quibble

No mate, your posts in this thread essentially consist of you whining about people using the Welcome thread to welcome new members (wow shock horror) and then going on about insignificant details like the last time the issue was raised. I actually contributed to the debate with a well thought out response which, as far as I'm concerned you basically overlooked. Not to mention virtually just completely dismissing Dan's opinion based on pedantic details like a single word. Your argument with him isn't even relevant to the discussion. Then you have the cheek to tell me it would be more beneficial if I didn't take part?

I tell you what, the whole forum would be better off without busy-bodies like you needlessly protesting pointless non-problematic issues.

i cantbelieve all this is really about weather or not peoples posts count increase in welcome forums or not

Tell me about it!

[Hecktix]

If only we could have discussions of this depth across the board eh?

[FlyingJesus]

No mate, your posts in this thread essentially consist of you whining about people using the Welcome thread to welcome new members

Nice skim reading, I especially like the part where you seem to have totally disregarded all the points mentioned as to why this is a good idea in order to just attempt to attack me.

and then going on about insignificant details like the last time the issue was raised.

That was only in reply to you saying it had never been brought up before, which you were trying to use as an argument against the thread, so it was hardly insignificant.

I actually contributed to the debate with a well thought out response which, as far as I'm concerned you basically overlooked.

Which points have I overlooked? I apologise if I truly have, but as far as I can see the only times I haven't replied to you directly have been when a point's already been covered previously.

Not to mention virtually just completely dismissing Dan's opinion based on pedantic details like a single word.

This I simply haven't done, and I'll thank you not to make such comments about me and how I work in discussions.

Then you have the cheek to tell me it would be more beneficial if I didn't take part?

No no, that wasn't a fact remember In any case, it was only to be supposed as any sort of view, whether fact or opinion, if you really do think that stating an opinionated prediction as fact is fine. I'm sure you're not so foolish as to do that, so the view that you shouldn't take part is not one that has come to light.

I tell you what, the whole forum would be better off without busy-bodies like you needlessly protesting pointless non-problematic issues.

The use of "would" there is disguising opinion as fact, how odd that you do that right after exactly such an action has been criticised. You'd probably do well not to make this personal, I understand it's not much fun when you're trying to stand up for behaviour totally unbefitting an otherwise intelligent discussion and being called out for it, but it's simply not good debate etiquette.

If Sam hadn't corrected Dan then those not in the know might have believed on his word that what he was saying was fact, and if we hadn't corrected you on your following post then it could have skewed peoples' view on what Sam had meant (which may have had a negative impact on how people see him as a member of discussions, and if we were to believe you then Sam's entire opinion was on the other "side" as it were so it benefits you and your argument that we did correct you), so both were entirely justified.

[Black_Apalachi]

I'd spend time replying to you properly but most of that right there is completely hypocritical and you're clearly out to cause arguments which you seem to be focusing on a lot more than the actual thread topic, as you once again overlooked the part of my post that is most relevant to the topic, so it's just not worth it.

[FlyingJesus]

Other than "(wow shock horror)" I didn't leave out anything you said to me there. I'm quite clearly not looking to cause arguments, I'm trying to stop people making false claims, and I asked questions of you as I really do want to know what points you think I haven't replied to, so that if there are any I can do so. Of course if people make disparaging remarks about me and my methods I'll respond, but I haven't done so aggressively and have instead simply replied to each part of your post.

As for being hypocritical, I'm not sure quite what you mean as to be hypocritical I'd have to first rebuke someone, and the only place I can see that having happened is in (rightly) saying that people shouldn't post opinions as facts, something I can't imagine I've done. I invite you (just as I invited you to show me what points I'd missed out on) to show me how and where I've been a hypocrite, for again it seems you are simply attacking me with false allegations.