External references - insults

[JohnA]

Can a user post an external link (or reference to a book) to insult another user?
Is this tactic allowed?
Why would this not result in a Warning against the user that employs this tactic, especially when this user keeps on doing it?

[Nickman]

Not intended as an insult, but as cautionary advice.

You are taking things far too seriously. Chill out, bro.

Keith,
Proving a line of a play to insult me, inferring that I'm idiot that has nothing to say is not something that I will skim over. Especially when mods are giving me unnecessary warnings/comments due to a clear personal prejudice; admitting that I am being targeted, ignoring other people breaking the rules and trolling me, ignoring my request for assistance.

This a known tactic of yours. You have done this a few times now to me. Why should this be allowed? Why should I get penalized with a personal attack when I refer to a 3rd fictitious person, but you can use this tactic and get away with it?

I am being targeted and being trolled. Mods are not helping me. All I can do is voice this in the open. When I did this before (posted an insulting pm/e-mail that user Danmark sent me), I ended up getting a warning for that.

How is that fair?

How is your back hand tactical insults fair?
How is Danmark's backhand insults fair?

How can users like Danmark troll me and get away with it?
How can Danmark make repeated unsupported illogical claims, and insult me directly and I get penalized indirectly for it?
Nickman insulted me, called me neurotic, but his post was approved by a mod. Is that fair?
NENB (no evidence no belief) insulted me ass well, but his post was approved by a mod. Is that fair?


Something is wrong here. And all I can do is bring out these facts and let people explain it to me.

Your answer of talking it too seriously is not a good one, because there are penalties being issues to me which will result in me being banned. The irony is that there is nothing that I can do to stop my posts from being target and me receiving unfair treatment, NOTHING. I have to resort to this now and open up and call out these, I have no choice. My guess is that this would not help me either, given your water of the ducks back response of "it is JohnA's fault - he takes it too serious". I find that disgusting, to be honest here. And it says more about you than it does about me.

Nickman called you neurotic? Please show me where.

[Nickman]

[Replying to post 3 by JohnA]

You should notice that the ones whom you say have insulted you have used tact.

[Nickman]

How can users like Danmark troll me and get away with it?
How can Danmark make repeated unsupported illogical claims, and insult me directly and I get penalized indirectly for it?
Nickman insulted me, called me neurotic, but his post was approved by a mod. Is that fair?
NENB (no evidence no belief) insulted me ass well, but his post was approved by a mod. Is that fair?


Something is wrong here. And all I can do is bring out these facts and let people explain it to me.

I don't really want to get involved in this drama rant. However, since you asked for people to explain things to you, I feel justified in offering my explanation.

You say that you have been insulted by Keithprosser3, Danmark, Nickman, NENB, but all of these posters are of the highest integrity. I've been reading their posts in general for months, if not years in some cases. Danmark and Keithprosser3 have both been nominated for "Best Debater", and I firmly support those nominations.

It's hard for me to imagine that you are suddenly being insulted by the some of the best debaters on this forum without just cause. If you have this many great debaters offering you less than complimentary replies I would suggest that the problem lies with you, and not with them.

As as second observation, I have also had lengthy discussions with you in the past myself, and IMHO, you were the one who was quick to sling the insults at me. I also felt that you were trolling me at the time. I didn't report it because I chose instead to just handle you directly myself. So you'll get no sympathy from me.

If you have that many great posters that you claim are insulting you, and you ask what's "wrong", I would suggest that you do a little introspection on the matter.

That's my explanation since you were kind enough to ask.

Are you saying that this tactic of Keith should be allowed?

Are you saying I have no evidence for my calims? Even after Keith indirectly admitted?

You are now blaming me for their behavior? How is that logical?

You also insulted me, called me a liar twice, and got no warning for that, but the mods closed that thread (http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... highlight=)because you did not want to stop your slanderous insulting rant (not only on me, but on another poster (scourge99) as well - why did you do this after the mods commented that it is getting to personal?).

Your 'mystical' explanation above makes no sense. And I know you get upset when I point this out. And yes, I do not know why you get upset when I point out faulty logic and reasoning. It is the same with Keith. He pushed me into answering questions that I already did, and then he decided to quote mine me, to straw man me and his tactic of doing it is to post a one line MacBeth play instigating that I am an idiot and have nothing to say. And the way he justifies that is to say I am taking it too serious. And he get's nominated has for been nominated for "Best Debater"? That is why I am asking this question. Is this type tactic allowed? And you have NOT answered my question.

On Danmark:
He starts making illogical claims when he does not want to agree with me because I show his reasoning faulty. At least you try and defend you illogical claims. All Danmark offers is accusations (straw man), empty claims (assertion fallacies), and insults (ad hominems). That is a typical trial lawyer (and you can gues if it is prosecution or defense - so typical). That is a clear biased grounded in an obscure obtuse reason filter. I have to say, his insults are tactful. Sending a person message, referring to me in his posts to other people, making a MPG donation when NENB insults me. And by referring I mean, INSULTING me, not stating any positives. How are these tactics ethical? And for that you say he is a good debater? Really? That is mystical rubbish DI. Why should his back hand insults be allowed. Why should he be allowed to mock theists when he says there is insufficient evidence for a non-existing god because Jesus appeared to him and said he is not a god. Does Danmark really believe this? Or is this just something that he uses to mock theists? I debated an omniscience/free-will paradox with Danmark and showed that it is indeed a paradox. And Danmark, instead of agreeing that I showed his logic faulty just went: This god does not exist... there is NO free will. I then asked Danmark how he knows there are no free-will. And he gave no answer, but he did instigate his tactful play insulting me, straw manning me, stating that it is a waste of time debating about this non-existing god whilst he continues debating it with other users.
Same thing with 'show me the evidence' thread. I stated that there can not be evidence for the bible god because the definition of faith says there is no evidence. Danmark disagrees, and offered a definition of evidence. I showed him that his own definition of evidence supports my point because the evidence needs to be relevant to the claim. That is besides the fact that faith says by entomological study that it is based on no evidence. And he offers his personal encounter with this Jesus saying that he said he is not a god. I find that disturbing, that is tactful mocking, that is contradictory. Why can't he just admit that his logic is faulty? Why launch an attack by trolling me just because I debated him in two different thread and ties the string of his illogical claims together. And the irony is that he has never once came out and denied his claims. But he refuses to defend these claims. But he is great at making straw man accusations on me, and even better as his sneaking tactics to insult me and infuriate me. And he get's nominated has for been nominated for "Best Debater"? That is why I am asking this question. Is this type tactic allowed? And you have NOT answered my question.

Good thing you had nothing on me in this post. Seems that your accusation is based on nothing.

[JohnA]

Not intended as an insult, but as cautionary advice.

You are taking things far too seriously. Chill out, bro.

Keith,
Proving a line of a play to insult me, inferring that I'm idiot that has nothing to say is not something that I will skim over. Especially when mods are giving me unnecessary warnings/comments due to a clear personal prejudice; admitting that I am being targeted, ignoring other people breaking the rules and trolling me, ignoring my request for assistance.

This a known tactic of yours. You have done this a few times now to me. Why should this be allowed? Why should I get penalized with a personal attack when I refer to a 3rd fictitious person, but you can use this tactic and get away with it?

I am being targeted and being trolled. Mods are not helping me. All I can do is voice this in the open. When I did this before (posted an insulting pm/e-mail that user Danmark sent me), I ended up getting a warning for that.

How is that fair?

How is your back hand tactical insults fair?
How is Danmark's backhand insults fair?

How can users like Danmark troll me and get away with it?
How can Danmark make repeated unsupported illogical claims, and insult me directly and I get penalized indirectly for it?
Nickman insulted me, called me neurotic, but his post was approved by a mod. Is that fair?
NENB (no evidence no belief) insulted me ass well, but his post was approved by a mod. Is that fair?


Something is wrong here. And all I can do is bring out these facts and let people explain it to me.

Your answer of talking it too seriously is not a good one, because there are penalties being issues to me which will result in me being banned. The irony is that there is nothing that I can do to stop my posts from being target and me receiving unfair treatment, NOTHING. I have to resort to this now and open up and call out these, I have no choice. My guess is that this would not help me either, given your water of the ducks back response of "it is JohnA's fault - he takes it too serious". I find that disgusting, to be honest here. And it says more about you than it does about me.

Nickman called you neurotic? Please show me where.

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 267#608267

[JohnA]

How can users like Danmark troll me and get away with it?
How can Danmark make repeated unsupported illogical claims, and insult me directly and I get penalized indirectly for it?
Nickman insulted me, called me neurotic, but his post was approved by a mod. Is that fair?
NENB (no evidence no belief) insulted me ass well, but his post was approved by a mod. Is that fair?


Something is wrong here. And all I can do is bring out these facts and let people explain it to me.

I don't really want to get involved in this drama rant. However, since you asked for people to explain things to you, I feel justified in offering my explanation.

You say that you have been insulted by Keithprosser3, Danmark, Nickman, NENB, but all of these posters are of the highest integrity. I've been reading their posts in general for months, if not years in some cases. Danmark and Keithprosser3 have both been nominated for "Best Debater", and I firmly support those nominations.

It's hard for me to imagine that you are suddenly being insulted by the some of the best debaters on this forum without just cause. If you have this many great debaters offering you less than complimentary replies I would suggest that the problem lies with you, and not with them.

As as second observation, I have also had lengthy discussions with you in the past myself, and IMHO, you were the one who was quick to sling the insults at me. I also felt that you were trolling me at the time. I didn't report it because I chose instead to just handle you directly myself. So you'll get no sympathy from me.

If you have that many great posters that you claim are insulting you, and you ask what's "wrong", I would suggest that you do a little introspection on the matter.

That's my explanation since you were kind enough to ask.

Are you saying that this tactic of Keith should be allowed?

Are you saying I have no evidence for my calims? Even after Keith indirectly admitted?

You are now blaming me for their behavior? How is that logical?

You also insulted me, called me a liar twice, and got no warning for that, but the mods closed that thread (http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... highlight=)because you did not want to stop your slanderous insulting rant (not only on me, but on another poster (scourge99) as well - why did you do this after the mods commented that it is getting to personal?).

Your 'mystical' explanation above makes no sense. And I know you get upset when I point this out. And yes, I do not know why you get upset when I point out faulty logic and reasoning. It is the same with Keith. He pushed me into answering questions that I already did, and then he decided to quote mine me, to straw man me and his tactic of doing it is to post a one line MacBeth play instigating that I am an idiot and have nothing to say. And the way he justifies that is to say I am taking it too serious. And he get's nominated has for been nominated for "Best Debater"? That is why I am asking this question. Is this type tactic allowed? And you have NOT answered my question.

On Danmark:
He starts making illogical claims when he does not want to agree with me because I show his reasoning faulty. At least you try and defend you illogical claims. All Danmark offers is accusations (straw man), empty claims (assertion fallacies), and insults (ad hominems). That is a typical trial lawyer (and you can gues if it is prosecution or defense - so typical). That is a clear biased grounded in an obscure obtuse reason filter. I have to say, his insults are tactful. Sending a person message, referring to me in his posts to other people, making a MPG donation when NENB insults me. And by referring I mean, INSULTING me, not stating any positives. How are these tactics ethical? And for that you say he is a good debater? Really? That is mystical rubbish DI. Why should his back hand insults be allowed. Why should he be allowed to mock theists when he says there is insufficient evidence for a non-existing god because Jesus appeared to him and said he is not a god. Does Danmark really believe this? Or is this just something that he uses to mock theists? I debated an omniscience/free-will paradox with Danmark and showed that it is indeed a paradox. And Danmark, instead of agreeing that I showed his logic faulty just went: This god does not exist... there is NO free will. I then asked Danmark how he knows there are no free-will. And he gave no answer, but he did instigate his tactful play insulting me, straw manning me, stating that it is a waste of time debating about this non-existing god whilst he continues debating it with other users.
Same thing with 'show me the evidence' thread. I stated that there can not be evidence for the bible god because the definition of faith says there is no evidence. Danmark disagrees, and offered a definition of evidence. I showed him that his own definition of evidence supports my point because the evidence needs to be relevant to the claim. That is besides the fact that faith says by entomological study that it is based on no evidence. And he offers his personal encounter with this Jesus saying that he said he is not a god. I find that disturbing, that is tactful mocking, that is contradictory. Why can't he just admit that his logic is faulty? Why launch an attack by trolling me just because I debated him in two different thread and ties the string of his illogical claims together. And the irony is that he has never once came out and denied his claims. But he refuses to defend these claims. But he is great at making straw man accusations on me, and even better as his sneaking tactics to insult me and infuriate me. And he get's nominated has for been nominated for "Best Debater"? That is why I am asking this question. Is this type tactic allowed? And you have NOT answered my question.

Good thing you had nothing on me in this post. Seems that your accusation is based on nothing.

What accusation Nickman? The one where you called me 'neurotic'? You are right, your accusation is not my or an accusation, it is in fact a slanderous ad hominem, because I can back up where you wrote it. Or are you saying my obsession is not part of me? Or are you denying that you authored that post? I did not see the mods apply a Comment / Warning for your slanderous post about/to me.

You are not being clear here.

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 267#608267

Man, you have a neurotic obsession with Danmark.

Or are you denying this post from no evidence no belief:
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 325#608325

no evidence no belief got a Mod Comment for that:
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 455#608455

You did not get a Comment/Warning. The button to report is no longer available, so I am assuming a mod did approve your post as not a slanderous ad hominem one. How is that fair? Is that why you are denying this slanderous accusation you made about/to me, is that your basis for denying this?

You are not being clear here, please help me understand. Think that DI said you were or have been nominated for Best Debater. So, it must be me that is mistaken here. Point out my mistake please.

[JohnA]

[Replying to post 3 by JohnA]

You should notice that the ones whom you say have insulted you have used tact.

Correct, so that is why I am asking is their tactics are against the rules or not.
Are you saying personal insults are allowed if you can do it tactful?

Where can I find a list that says which tactics are allowed to circumvent the rules?

At least Danmark is admitting something:
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 380#609380

But I can not trust him, based on his incoherency.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 394#609394

[JohnA]

I see a lot of projection on your part JohnA. I have seen you several times attack another poster, and then accuse them of engaging in ad hominem. Also much of your posts are in barely coherent English and when when another poster (understandably) misunderstands you, you accuse them of straw manning you. These things make communicating with you frustrating to say the least.

Can you provide any evidence for you accusation?
Or is this merely your claim, a claim that you refuse to support, similar to Danmark's claims?
Or is this your tactful way to try and discredit me (a back hand insult)?


Danmark is the only one so far that have been able to make all 3 (false accusations, unsupported claims and offer back hand insults). I suggest you should ask him how that is possible. I do not know. I struggle with this, and Danmark refuses to come out of hiding about this.
(edit : seems like he is admitting, but it may be too late:
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 394#609394 )

And notice, I am not accusing you, I am asking questions.

[help3434]

[Replying to post 16 by JohnA]

I would, but you have disabled access to your posts from your profile.

[JohnA]

[Replying to post 16 by JohnA]

I would, but you have disabled access to your posts from your profile.

There is a thread search.

And please, do remember to make your 'evidence' relevant to your accusations.

[assisigirl]

Who is this guy?