>someone posts an opinion that's verifiably wrong
>make a post that irrefutably proves that they're wrong
>they shift the discussion to something else or resort to attacking you instead
this shouldn't be as frustrating as it is. i dont have enough smug anime girls to deal with this bullshit
>arguing online
>arguing at all
no one ever changes their opinions after this shit. facts don't mean anything to people. it's all about feelings
it's enough to make a man mad
>post
>nobody gives shit
>feels like being autist
>>34572570
>opinion
>verifiably wrong
>>34573946
Opinions can be based on false information
>>34573990
That's completely different from an opinion itself being wrong.
>post on /r9k/ every day
>somehow I'm the last poster in the thread 80% of the time
>pedophile thread
>some normie gets mad
>type a response explaining that their hatred is just a tool used by the Jews to control the population and expand the power of the federal government
>thread is already deleted
>>34574031
It's literally an opinion that's wrong. You're arguing semantics.
>effortpost helpful shit for days on small board
>make one joke shitpost in response to a joke shitpost in a shitpost thread that gets reposted ten times a day and the mods just leave all of them up
>get banned for 3 days, all posts wiped from the board
>multiple shit troll and off-topic threads still up
>second time this has happened in two weeks
I don't really care, since most of the people who would have benefited from my posts already read them.
But still. Reminds me of Ice Queen or Ozma on SomethingAwful. Why not moderate with a light touch instead of treating it like a little fiefdom?
>>34574057
>>34574086
Fuck, these two hit too close to home.
Also;
>someone needs help with something
>give them the answer/source
>they never reply
To be honest I forget to do it myself half the time
>>34574226
How about
>someone needs help with something
>give detailed helpful reply
>someone else also replies with one sentence of stupid shit
>person only replies to the one sentence guy
FUCK
>>34574110
No, it's literally a fact that's wrong.
>>34574998
You're playing semantics kiddo.
>>34575131
That is literally, LITERALLY not what semantics means.
>>34575159
You're arguing about the definition of a 'false fact' and a 'wrong opinion' it's a semantic argument.
>>34575305
Again, that's not a semantic. Facts and opinions are in no way interchangeable.
>>34575477
You're arguing about definitions i.e. literal semantics
>>34575305
>false fact
Oxymoron, facts are grounded in truth. The phrase you're looking for is "incorrect information".
>wrong opinion
Awfully clunky phrase here. Also an oxymoron because opinions in and of themselves are based on preferences.
>>34575543
There is no argument about definitions you dumbass, it's an objective fact that "fact" and "opinion" are two completely different concepts entirely.
>>34576487
This entire back & forth started because you wanted to argue the difference between an 'opinion based off wrong information' and a 'wrong fact' when it was hardly germane to the topic at hand. That's L I T E R A L L Y a semantic argument
>>34576584
No, this entire back and forth started because you said "opinion that's verifiably wrong", and there's
L I T E R A L L Y
I
T
E
R
A
L
L
Y
no such thing.
>>34576635
>I think the Cleveland Browns were the best football team of 2016-2017
>>34576666
So not only do you not know what semantics are, you don't know what the word opinion means either. Jesus fucking christ.
Laughing at my retarded ass now for even trying to discuss this with you.
>op's thread gets derailed
>probably assblasted right now
good job, anons.
>>34576704
You're backing out because that one example just destroyed your entire facetious argument
>>34572570
>post in a thread
>thread dies right after
or worse yet
>type out a well made post that would shock even the most intelligent of men
>threads dead before I could post it
>>34572648
>no one ever changes their opinions after this shit. facts don't mean anything to people. it's all about feelings
if you're a woman
i have been shown the way and have corrected my ways before. Smart people who have beaten me in ethical/moral arguements have changed my views.
>>34572570
>reply to any thread
>no replies after mine and the thread diesSOMEBODY STOP ME
>>34578903
>Smart people who have beaten me in ethical/moral arguements have changed my views.
give an example
>>34579049
i used to be one one of those fags who viciously catorgarized robots and made "ranks" until a robot called me out for being a circle jerking fag and told me what /r9k/ is really about. funposting, luls and sharing interesting content. not catogorizing eachother based off how much of a looser you are
i often times feel like shifting back to the nazi robot side but it dosen't make the board any better.
>person expresses opinion
>labels those that disagree with this opinion as betas and cuckolds, or believes the only people that would disagree are non-whites and women
>person believe non-whites, women, "betas," and "cuckolds" are irrational and stupider than them
>by disagreeing you are labeling yourself as one of the aforementioned labels
>by disagreeing you are showing yourself to be irrational and stupider than them
>they do not have to give an argument or evidence for their claims because you are irrational and stupid, so you will not understand or be swayed anyway
>all arguments refuting them are invalidated because the person arguing against them is irrational and stupid
>person can not be wrong and does not have to justify their claims
every argument about trump
>>34572648
>no one ever changes their opinions after this shit
you are under the assumption opinions are like a switch that can be flipped in an instant. Most opinions are changed some time later on, after it has had time to grow in the person's mind. People do change their minds, just not the way you want them to
>>34579435
>tfw no apu nephew
>>34572570
lt's enough to make a man mad.