Beck has no principles. He is a demagogue.
And a moron.
Ye Shall Be As Jesters; Xenogears is the best RPG.
Baldur’s Gate II ftw.
Well there you go- even someone like you who doesn’t enjoy most of that stuff still found at least one game that you think is worthwhile. There’s so many out there that anyone who says they’re all a waste of time hasn’t even tried it.
I said that if he believes that, he will not help the movement. I never said “all that matters is helping the movement”. I confined my statement merely to the scope of the movement itself, not to any other matter. If you want to label my comment as “activist minded”, whatever; but know that such an assertion is almost as worthless and irrelevant as if I were to label your above response as “argumentatively minded”. In other words, yes, it was indeed “activist minded”; but that is merely because all I was referring to is matters related to activism. If you want to be a loner who attempts to discover truth in your basement and viciously and dogmatically attacks any dissenters, do it unless it conflicts with some of your other values; viz. if you desire to most effectively advance the ‘liberty movement’, you will need to adopt a less dogmatic tone. I cannot merely tell you that you should be less dogmatic and less abusive; but I can tell you that if you desire to most effectively advance the ‘liberty movement’, you should be less dogmatic and less abusive.
and what is the possible relevance of this comment, other than to imply that one should therefore NOT believe something, if you don’t wnat to harm the movement? That we should choose our beliefs based on tactical considerations? That truth is subservient to activist considerations?
maybe; maybe not. But a tone is not the same as a belief. You were criticizing the holding of a belief, based on its consequences for the movement. Not a tone.
Dogmatic? Do you here mean tone, or beliefs? now you see to be waffling.
As for abusive–what is abusive is the way the state robs and kills. What is abusive is the support my neighbors and other socialists give to the state to steal from me.
I believe that I have located your misunderstanding. I did attack his belief; that is that I told him that if he believes that “polite debate is a waste of time”, he will not help the movement. But if you examine the context wherein my statement exists, you will realize that my statement itself would be incorrect if the belief which it attacks were to be correct. In other words, if the belief that “polite debate is a waste of time” were true, it would be false to say that “[i]f you believe that [polite debate is a waste of time], you will not help the movement” because the latter statement would imply that polite debate is actually not a waste of time and is instead more effective which would contradict to former statement. And therefore I did not imply that truth is subordinate to strategy but that, in that situation, truth is coordinate to strategy.
It is somewhat interesting that you claimed that my statements were collectively equivocal. If you realize that the dichotomous relationship between “tone” and “belief” which you introduced is identical to the dichotomous relationship between “actions” and “ideas” and you ignore the negative connotation of the word “equivocal”, you will probably almost immediately realize that I actually legitimately equivocated between such notions: The ideas/beliefs which a man holds directly determine the action which that man performs where the tone of his argumentation of one of such actions. As an example (which you will notice that I drew from the context of this argument), if you believe that polite debate is a waste of time and you do not desire to waste your time, you will invariably not debate politely.
Unless I missed your point, the above statement is completely irrelevant to this argument.
You missed his point.
If you desire to actually construct an argument, you should elaborate.
I don’t, and I wasn’t. I was simply making an observation.
If you did not plan to prove that your observation is true, why did you even post it?
My subjective evaluation is not subject to the burden of proof. I never promoted it as more than my opinion, not objective fact.
Perhaps you did understand him, but intentionally chose to claim you did not. Perhaps for petty reasons. Perhaps for more nefarious ones.
I don’t know.
But based on your response, my observation is that you did misunderstand him, because his statement was relevant to the conversation, or at least, I was able to see relevance in it.
YMMV.
Try not to be so serious. The constipated avatar of Benito doesn’t help…
Can we at least all agree that Starcraft was the best RTS of all time? I know Stephen would agree, errmm… JK! 
I really do not care about your conclusion unless you also provide your rationale. If you want to tell to me what relevance you recognized, I will listen. If do not want to, whatever.
Unless they want to discredit and shut out themselves from all future discussion on any issue.
Final Fantasy IX is better than Final Fantasy VII in my opinion. <_<
The Xeno series is without a doubt the best series, and I have the math equation to prove it. FFII/IV for my favorite FF, and Civ IV for most addicting game ever.
Civilization should be called Government - The Game
Arguably it is. I liked both.
Sorry to resurrect a super-old thread but I just love how this degenerated into a discussion of FF and such.