This board is open for all subject matters. Post information and discussion materials about open-debate and censorship on other boards (including this one) here. Memory Hole 2 is a RODOH subforum for alternate perspectives.
Werd wrote: ↑21 Mar 2020, 06:26
He keeps acting like we don't understand relationships between premises and a conclusion. We understand it just fine. He's beating a dead horse for no reason. He dodges the amount of holes in proposition
I think that Carl put it nicely with the last post on the thread before it was axed.
Carl Baker wrote:I have been reviewing some older RODOH posts where Nessie debates with deniers and it is evident he doesn’t even read their posts or follow links they give him. Debating with Nessie is like talking to a broken record and it is hardly surprising his troll like behaviour has got him into hot water. Coming here earlier this month and lying about the status of his posting privileges certainly hasn’t endeared him with the Moderators either.
Anyway Nessie has left us, lets hope it doesn't change its mind.
Yep. He too sees that Nessie doesn't bother to read what's in front of him. But then I knew that first hand when he would constantly dodged things that I put in front of him. Often with big red text. Other times Nessie sees it but ignores it and feigns not seeing it. That's what makes him a dishonest troll.
Well since there is more evidence for proposition A that Nessie is a troll than there is that he could not be considered a troll - premise B - then it stands to reason that A is true.
Nessie forgets or, more likely, just ignores the first rule of evidence. "Is it possible?". Nessie demands proof of "A" or "B" without considering that his "A" is an impossibility. Nessie demands proof that the little boy didn't ride his tricycle to the moon.
