LogFAQs > #978895800

Bandit_Keith posted...

I didn't ignore a single point.

Bandit_Keith posted...

Yes. My point is the hypocrisy of your view. Like I stated, you seem to believe "they could have responded like this, but since they didn't I will attack them instead of their argument."

For every action is a reaction. It started from them attacking me, and it went downhill from there. I was totally fine before that. You don't see it as condescending? Fine, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Bandit_Keith posted...

Your argument had never once come close to suggesting that this isn't about the law that I read. But I could have missed something. Even still, your line and the law are at the same place, so my point stands on face value.

It didn't need to, the whole topic from then on was about a grey line. And yes, my views ultimately do reflect that part of the law. However some users still disagreed with me because I had the view of disliking euthanasia and self-suicide in general. I guess that was more of the point to the topic?

Bandit_Keith posted...

I would have called it dismissive at worst, personally. But that is ultimately semantics. It still doesn't amount to a personal attack. If you fel part of a response had a condescending tone, that's fair. That still doesn't excuse going into a personal attack.

I was being attacked in the first place by that condescending tone. If you spoke to someone in real life like that, I sincerely doubt they would take it well. But again, agree to disagree.

Bandit_Keith posted...

Regardless of what was in the base article, you still came in without the facts to claim you were 100% against it. Again, this isn't disputable. Most everyone came in without the facts. You've already acknowledged that "100%" line was an exaggeration, so we don't need to rehash that. I accept that response, and understand it. You wanted to steer the discussion into a slippery slope argument, and again, that's fine. If you'd like to continue talking about slippery slopes, that's fine too.

And I say all this not as some grand arbiter. Just another person voicing their opinions. Which is all good.

Fair enough, if you think I overreacted then I would take on board. I actually prefer talking to you since I can see level-headedness in your answers.