The only "tactic" used was to say that the basic assumptions used in the thought experiment (mental exercise) were wrong. Anything else was either an innocent switching of synonymous terms, or imagined on your part. Isn't the meat of an argument far more important that sitting there and nit-picking every little word used? We obviously disagree on the merits of the initial assumptions; going into some point-by-point pissing match doesn't accomplish anything.
Ludd said:
"Paris Hilton may disagree with that. 
"
Well, I wouldn't expect her to understand the subtleties of context.
Re: Honest debate doesn\'t pay :(
Threaded Mode