Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
Okay then.
My point stands: you are being too cryptic. If I find your position vague or cryptic and ask for a clarification, you should either give it or admit you either a) don't want to, or b) can't.
As it stands, you refuse to shed some light as to what you're getting at: i.e. what your point is, what your argument is, what you mean to say specifically.
And so instead of providing the clarity that was fairly requested, you instead suggest that the problem isn't with your refusal to have a mature discussion but instead with others' inability to look at their own positions/arguments and their penchant for being partisan hacks.
Nice.
Let me know when you want to play fair and balanced.
|
I'm sorry, but maybe you can point out to me where my question of 'is this also false equivalence' and 'is this also violent rhetoric' is anything close to being cryptic?
If necessary, maybe you'd like me to transcribe the whole video, word for word, that way I could highlight and underline each specific phrase and/or sentence in question. Then I could choose a specific person to answer said highlighted statement with a very specific answer in reference to the very specific question.
would that be too cryptic for you?