Sarcasm aside, that's the point I've been trying to make. Opinions can be bad or ill informed. People have idiotic opinions about all sorts of things. You can say you think their opinion is wrong, but that doesn't mean it's not an opinion. Pluto was trying to say that AA's opinion was in fact not an opinion but rather a declarative statement of irrefutable truth. AA never stated his subjective opinion was anything other than his own subjective opinion.

Thanks for proving my point. I was worried we were going to have to have this discussion all day.

 

Good God, GoLion. This is a DISCUSSION forum. What are you even doing here if you don't think people should ask others why they have a certain opinion or want to uselessly declare an opinion without scrutiny? Stop wasting your's and everyone else's time with this "you don't need to justify opinions" nonsense. I appreciate the dramatic flair but Jesus Christ.

Seriously, can you imagine if everytime someone on this forum was asked why they felt the way they did about something the response was "NO! IT'S MY OPINION! I DON'T NEED A REASON!".

 

If AA was responding like that I would be in full agreement with you. The problem is a few select posters were pretty much implying that AA was stupid because of his opinion, that's the part I have a problem with.

And again, it was a throwaway comment. He wasn't trying to say he was right about anything. It's how he took it when he first saw the reveal. Honestly, I thought that at first too.

It was other posters that were saying he was stupid for having his opinion that I have a problem with. Granted, they were doing it in such a manner as to just skirt breaking the rules, but they were absolutely doing it.

 

My darling little peanut what you are describing is called a non falsifiable statement and is therefore a bad claim. You dont need to be that smart to get it but you do need to get out of the right side of the bed. All i or anyone has said so far is that AA needs more evidence to back up their statements but rather than actually doing so yall doubled down on bananas semantics. If you arent interested in justifying your claims then as Hardlurk says what is purpose of stating them?

Honestly how is “justify yr dumb statements” a controversial thing to say?

For the record i think charging an artist with an excess of ego is a perfectly banal thing to say. Ego is one of the driving forces of artistic production. But to focus on Rung in particular, i’m with Starscream Gaga on this, and as for the petty criticism of an author insert well guess what fuckos
t h e y a l l w e r e
author inserts. Roberts was the writer?

 

Yikes. Your legs must be exhausted having to jump through all those hoops to justify that silly take.

The way you move the goal posts around to justify your bad faith argument is truly a sight to behold.

It's my mistake to assume you're having a discussion in good faith. You're not, you'd justify anything to argue against someone if you deem their opinion stupid.

Ultimately, no matter how you choose to dress it up, your posts amount to nothing but, "I don't like this person's posts so I'm going to hold that particular post to higher scrutiny". That's it. You can dress it up however you want, but that's it. Keep going though.


Someone's subjective opinion is not meant to be held up to scrutiny. People are allowed to have flippant opinions. They don't have to back them up. It's that simple.


And the thing you will never address (because you can't) is that you can't prove the negative. Yes, AA's post might be false, but you can't prove it's false. You have no idea what Roberts' intent was with that character. So you asking him to justify his opinion when you can't justify the opposite REALLY speaks volumes about this situation.

And you know damn well what people are talking about when they say they dislike Rung being god of the transformers. Rung was Roberts' original character his. It would be like... was it Costa that created Drift? It would be like Drift suddenly being made a god. It could be seen as an author's ego wanting his original character to be the god of the transformers. Now, that subjective opinion could be wrong, sure, but that doesn't mean it should be held to some silly standard simply because some dude - with way too much time on his hands - can't deal with someone's different opinion.

You're actually pretty formulaic in your responses. I notice you tend to stoop to insulting people when you can't actually give a cogent response. It's like you think that being snarky makes up for the fact that you don't actually have anything of substance to say.

And again, for the umpteenth time. You DON'T HAVE TO JUSTIFY A FLIPPANT OPINION. An opinion doesn't have to be backed up by facts. It can be made on a whim and dismissed just as easily.

We can keep having this circular argument if you want. It obviously matters to you.

And there is a difference between a declarative statement and a subjective opinion, but you know that too. AA is not stating that his opinion is what actually happened. He's stating that it's his opinion that is what happened.

There is a difference between stating something like:
The sky is pink

I think the sky is pink.

Ocean of difference between those two sentences. I guess they're the exact same thing to you, though. Oh well. I don't have the time to explain to you the difference between a declarative statement and a subjective opinion, peanut.

And you know this. I don't know why you're keeping this up. This is just you feeling the need to be right. That's all it is. I said one thing and you feel it's your duty to say it's not.

 

Dude, thats what a non falsifiable claim is. Its literally what i have been saying from moment dot. Someone said something divorced from reality and i said “prove it or dont be taken seriously” if you cant that is not a flaw in anything except the original non falsifiable claim.

I put my opinions re: rung out up there, as boring as they are, and by all means have a go if you must. i’m perfectly at ease with the idea that one might disagree with them and want to argue with me. Hardly the shocking existential revelation that seems to be sending you into a conniption fit.

As has been said ad nauseum by now, if you arent interested in discussing yr claims then why are you here?

 

For the record i like to think i am snarky and full of substance.

 

No, a non falsifiable claim is when someone makes a declarative statement that can't be disproven. a flippant opinion does not meet that requirement. Nice try, though. Again. Putting "In my view" or "in my opinion" removes it from that level of scrutiny.

Oh, you're definitely full of something.

I am here to discuss my claims. That's fine. If you wanted to discuss AA's OPTINION in a civil manner you would have just said you disagree with him and moved on. Instead, what you choose to do it insult him a few pages back. Much like how you're insulting me now.

People should want to discuss their differing opinions on this board. They shouldn't have to deal with someone who is obviously only here to try to stir the pot and harass people for simply thinking things he doesn't like.

And you're obviously not fine with people disagreeing with you simply because you've been going at it with me most of the day. If you really didn't care, as you claim, you wouldn't continue the conversation.

I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with people and attacking their ideas. I have a problem with you disagreeing with people and CONSTANTLY attacking them.

Again, AA didn't claim anything, he shared his opinion on the subject. There is a difference and you know it.

He didn't state something like, "Roberts making Rung Primus is an ego move"
He said, "In my opinion, Roberts making Rung Primus is an ego move"

Those are a completely different animal. And you know it. If he had said the former I would have asked him to elaborate. When he said it was his own subjective opinion I knew at that point that he couldn't back said opinion up and treated the opinion as just an opinion. It was something I could easily dismiss since he had already made it clear that it was just his subjective take and he wasn't trying to imply that it was an objective truth.
​

 

This is all getting weirdly personal as a substitute for progression. I’ve said my piece, it hasnt changed all that much, i remain unconvinced by ya goofy sledging and unwillingness to accept even basic propositions about well worn argumentative forms. I reckon take a big gulp of air, maybe get yaself a cuppa and a biscuit.

 

And you continue to insult people when the disagree with you. Cool. I guess that works in lieu of a civil conversation.

Oh, and you know there is a difference between a subjective opinion and a declarative statement. You can keep skirting around that with your obvious sophistry but it doesn't change anything.

And it's weird that you keep claiming I'm insulting you. I make one flippant remark after you've made a dozen and you somehow think that what I've done is beyond the pale? Is that from Alinsky? Claim that the other guy is doing something that you yourself are guilty of doing?

Maybe go a day without telling someone they're stupid for disagreeing with you.

 

I mean that might qualify.

Pls note that AA only claimed this as an opinion after they were repeatedly asked for justification.

Anyway, that kettle on the boil yet? I recommend sleepy time with the soothing chamomile.

 

It only qualified if you're finally admitting you're wrong. His clarification of his original post is all the explanation required. He originally made a claim, was called on it, and then clarified to show that it is just his subjective opinion. One that he can't back up with factual evidence. It's wrapped up in a nice little bow.

You then proceed to tear him apart for the better part of a page insisting that he back up his obviously subjective opinion. I could even understand your position if he had insisted that his view was the correct one but he admitted that it wasn't. He admitted that it was only his opinion. That it didn't require any real level of scrutiny.

And ultimately, I don't think it's a problem that you attack people's ideas. It's just a real nuisance when you slyly insult just about EVERYONE who disagrees with you.

 

I would think if we're having an argument about this level of nuance in conversation, you would understand that putting "I think" in front of everything is tiresome, and that things being opinions on a forum is implied. The OP did not say "cite your evidence", therefore it was not required. Especially not to state an opinion. You're criticizing me solely based on criteria you jammed into the discussion.

This is pointless doubletalk from you anyways - you called my original post ridiculous and lacking evidence, but somehow now that (and a dozen clarifications from me) wasn't enough to tell you it was just an opinion?

 

You mean one sentence in one post right? To the effect that if it was an opinion, it was a pretty shit opinion. It even contained a good definition of the evidential requirements of a logically sound statement! Not more or less than that. Then in you come after the discussion was over getting your sass on about the whole thing. I mean talk about “attacking people’s ideas,” four pages after the original debate had been closed down here we are! I even gave you an out to talk about the topic! Give it a rest friendo.

 

Why is it a shit opinion? Because you claim it so?

How about you give it a rest. I have a feeling as long as I respond you will also continue to do so.

And again, this ALL boils down to you not liking something someone else said. You can continue to dress it up all you like.

 

I feel attacked.

 

If you want people to respect your opinion then you have to do an adequate job of justifying it.

 

No one ever asked for any opinions to be respected - just for them to be recognized as opinions instead of being misconstrued as hard statements. No offense, but if you actually read the thread and took the comments' meaning to mind, I don't see how you could have come to this conclusion that respect is part of the equation.

The comics forum has a running theme of blatantly misinterpreting the easiest things to win arguments.

 

and yet

In my opinion, the solution is to accept that in other people's opinions your opinions are stupid (i.e., that they do not respect them), or to provide them with a justification they will accept as non-stupid.

 

I agree with you. Did you even read my post? I don't care if someone says it's stupid. All I wanted this whole thread was to make it clear I was stating an opinion and not trying to assert myself as right.

(I'm guessing you didn't read my post, because GoLion not appreciating people calling people stupid has nothing to do with GoLion or anyone else asking for respect for opinions, so not sure why you felt that quote from GoLion was relevant)