See here we go, this is somewhat more on topic, and the parts that aren't at least are more worth addressing now.
Based on what?
My post count, post length, and general lack of scrutiny involved with what topics I reply to by now ought to more than express that it's not a matter of laziness. Responding to your odd ramblings about a supposed history of jealousy would mean I have a reason to bother, meaning either you made points that looked good enough to address or that your reputation could drift people without the need for facts or evidence. Neither of those are the case, so there's no reason to address your points that are otherwise unrelated.
At this point, I don't even think Inq would second your post you've made about our history being the motivation.
as you're likely just going to follow all of this with unrelated reputation attacks...
wait...isn't this precisely what you did when you changed the topic and started talking about how people were taking inq's side only because of some supposed manufactured reputational "totem" versus his argument?
It was a side tangent to handle the bandwagon response resulting from Inq's reputation versus Legga's solely.
Sometimes being right isn't enough for people, especially once there's clearly established ingroups and outgroups, and it's not otherwise unusual for me to step in and support the otherwise socially undesirable side.
that won't do much more than embarrass yourself through showing how little of this topic you're actually absorbing, and with how prone you are to self-congratulations, appealing to you'd likely be a stubborn chore to handle anyway with little to show for it after the fact.
a 'stubborn chore', heh?
Yeah. For whatever effort I'd put in, the return wouldn't amount to anything.
This is one of the reasons inq has given you in the past for why he ends debates with people like say Tony. A reason you refused to accept and used to instead criticize him for being lazy and not open-minded. A double standard is at play on your side. Can you at least admit that?
The difference is that he would still get into debates with him, withdrawing after the fact (while baselessly declaring himself the winner) with this idea of it being a waste of his time after seeing that the task wasn't as easy as it originally appeared. He won't even wait for Spatial to fall into debate fallacies most of the time, instead checking out towards his stubborn routines purely over feeling that he's "right" and that his opponent is "wrong" in a very closed minded way.
Why he stopped debating with Spatial Mind is because he now recognizes him as a difficult opponent, leading to him moving onto others.
The traps Inq's found himself in aren't even hard ones to understand, and are present within all of Legga's very purposeful word choices, and your focus on making it about baseless reputation motives serves to distract from the actual points being made in here even more so than when Inq was resorting to it.
Hmm...and yet you're the one who has repeatedly shown you're extremely bothered by Inq's reputation for some reason. And not just in this thread. You begged him to change his avi and you even went so far to redesign a ridiculous one to see if that would change how people perceive him. You care a bit too much.
"And yet" nothing, this is you trying to worm it towards reputation-based unrelated subject matter again. What does any of this have to do with Legga's paper, Legga's list, Inquirer's list, or any of the points made therein?
Just read the topic and try to grasp it, as all you're doing with this is proving me right again. I prefer to be wrong about a person's potential, yet here you are.
Where Inq could really benefit from a proper wingman right now, he'll need one that can actually tell what's going on.
I'm not winging for him. I'm pointing out that you have personal issues at play.
What does that have to do with this topic though?
You've done no better than charge into a topic and yell "You're just jealous!" during the middle of an otherwise serious discussion over accepted praxis.
lol a serious discussion. You're all just honestly going around in circles at this point.
Can you explain how it's happening though, or the subtle shifts in said "circles" that are actually amounting to an otherwise evolving discussion?
Nah, you're just going to do more Gossip Girl. Why not leave this talk to the professionals?
To make things even more embarrassing, your behavior here was easy enough to predict as far back as page 8.
And your behaviour was easy enough to predict on old SC when you spazzed the first time he was made mod and everyone cheered. :p
...if it's easy enough to predict, then why do you keep acting all shocked and surprised over it and things like it?
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
