Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2016-06-30 06:37 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2016-06-30 06:37 pm
[ SECRET POST #3466 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3466 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02.
[BRÅVES- "Lovely Bones" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiTx4qufF2g)]
__________________________________________________
03.
[The Doctor Blake Mysteries]
__________________________________________________
04.
[fault milestone one]
__________________________________________________
05.
__________________________________________________
06.
__________________________________________________
07.
__________________________________________________
08.
__________________________________________________
09. http://i.imgur.com/XFAoKt9.png
[linked for porn, animated]
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 09 secrets from Secret Submission Post #495.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
no subject
You just have no proof.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2016-07-01 04:17 pm (UTC)(link)no subject
And yet you here you are with the ~you people~ and the ~you'll just dismiss it anyway~ and the ~no? didn't think so~ without even giving the commenter you responded to a chance to respond herself.
In debate terms, this is called poisoning the well: i.e., you've "predicted" how your opponents are going to respond, meaning that if they do respond that way - whether your sources actually are biased or not - you can simply say "hah! I told you so! You were going to dismiss me no matter what I posted!" leaving them only the option to agree with you if they don't want that outcome.
You'd fail a debate automatically at this point with a simple nod to the judges, so...
no subject
(Anonymous) 2016-07-01 05:19 pm (UTC)(link)And it's hilarious, the way you blow yourself up to be some sort of debate masters. Hint: This here? Isn't a debate. It's a fandomsecrets thread which started out with a simple "the comments are getting deleted" -"No they didn't" - "yes they did".
And the reason why I'm such a "dipshit" about this (petty namecalling, btw, invalidates your arguments in a debate as well, you master-debater)? Because I've had this happen to me over and over again, that people who demand "proof" and "sources" are moving the goalpost every single time you give them what they asked for. And I'm pretty pissed about this.
no subject
But more importantly:
Why are you being such a dipshit yourself? I didn't see you bitching at the other anon for not providing evidence that the comments DIDN'T get deleted, that's exactly the same thing.
No, no it isn't. The burden of proof is always on the person making the positive assertion (i.e. something does exist, something did happen, as opposed to it doesn't, or didn't). If you don't like that, don't make unsubstantiated claims. At the very least, don't be offended when someone asks you to substantiate them. What you're doing is asking the other commenters to prove a negative, which is a logical fallacy - of course I wouldn't get on their cases for that. That's your bad, not theirs.
You're right, "dipshit" is a personal attack. I should have chosen: hostile, overly defensive, illogical, reactionary, or unable to express or defend your position well, as these are evidenced by your own statements.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2016-07-01 05:41 pm (UTC)(link)Sure, do ignore the posted sources because you want to whine about how ~you can't say anything about them anymore~. That's alright. But this here? This is a clear case of "some people say they got their comments deleted" and someone else piping in saying something like 'no, they are lying'. So the person accusing people of lying about this has to prove that this is true just as much.
Ah yes, anyone who doesn't want to make a fandomsecrets thread into some award winning debate show is automatically illogical, unable to express their position and overly defensive. Gotcha.
And now excuse me, I have other things to do than playing ~debate~ with someone on fandomsecrets.
no subject
So the person accusing people of lying about this has to prove that this is true just as much.
Sure, you can make that argument now, but before you posted sources, you couldn't, as you had no form of positive evidence.
Ah yes, anyone who doesn't want to make a fandomsecrets thread into some award winning debate show is automatically illogical, unable to express their position and overly defensive.
Well, no, that's just what you've demonstrated with the way you're attempting to persuade people of your point of view. Doubling down with hyperbole and defensive sarcasm isn't helping.
no subject
Actually, no it's not. You can't prove a negative. When an action (especially an unlikely one) is claimed, you must prove that it happened, or the most logical path to take is to assume it probably didn't. (ETA: ariakas explained this much better than I. should have read her other comments first, oops)
Also, to be really nitpicky, saying you're acting like a dipshit is commenting on your behavior, not calling you names. An ad hom attack is something more along the lines of "but you're just a moron" while not addressing any of the actual points.