Sort of does work really. I was just trying to avoid words like ‘alpha male’ and ‘beta male’ in the example I was giving. But it’s good as an example of humans being essentially pack persistence hunters, probably easier if I do use those terms (ignore Adam Ruins Everything episodes for this since that episode was god-awfully stupid).

Clevin is a nice, cute, poofy guy who isn’t aggressive at all and is almost annoyingly apologetic, as well as not in the least bit intimidating (ie, he’s corgi-like) – and for this example, we’ll describe him as a ‘beta male.’ People like Max and Patrick are very take-charge, socially aggressive men who dominate a conversation – so lets describe them as ‘alpha males.’ In Max’s brief but passive confrontation with Clevin, he humiliated him without even trying by talking about how dinner and a movie is a lame attempt at a date, although he did not know that Clevin had just tried that unsuccessfully with Alison. This caused him to shy away while Max swooped in and asked her out more suavely, even with the handicap of having decidedly evil-looking cheekbones. Patrick, on the other hand, has in the past been able to manipulate Alison with his words every step of the way, including manipulating her into hating him, and yet she’s still taking care of him when he comes to her now in this state, and describing him to Feral in a rather positive way, rather than the truth (although that might be because it would implicate her as well). Any the FIRST time Patrick speaks to Clevin, he humiliates him verbally (on purpose, as opposed to Max’s incidental humiliating of Clevin), and then scares him with a deep dark secret of Clevin’s (even though it’s basically a harmless, understandable secret by normal people standards).

So…. it’s conceivable that Clevin is, in fact, not particularly smart – at least when it comes to social interaction. Or he could just be easily intimidated. He’s obviously smart at certain things, like music, and he somehow manages to wear heart-shaped glasses without most people thinking he looks dumb (I guess that’s just me). You have to talk to Clevin in a very positive, happy way for him to be comfortable (like with Alison’s upbeat dad). Any confrontation and he shrinks back (even with Pintsize when he was clearly joking, until Brad let him know he was not being serious with the ‘toxic masculinity’ crack). When thetalk turned to Moonshadow, which would be something traumatic to Clevin, he shrank back there as well. When he was not mentioned in Alison’s speech, he felt small there also.

Oh please Gotham that’s such a beta thing to say! 😉

“Even when yourself have to do caveats about the words you’re using (“at least when it comes to social interaction”) it means that his intelligence / comprehension skill has in fact very little to do with what you’re talking about.”

There are many different types of intelligence. There’s a reason that even though Steve Wozniak was the technical genius at Apple, most people associate Apple with ‘visionary’ Steve Jobs instead. And I put caveats in because I prefer being correct. Life has caveats.

“But coming back to what you are talking about because I see worrying signs here, you are forbidden from using bullshit terms like “alpha and beta males” ever. again. ”

Honest and true, sir? I’m not permitted to use those terms? Being a taad authoritarian are we? Read my post. I even say why I WASNT using those terms at first. I was not using them in some sort of scientific way like in the study that Arkone mentions in his post. But when I said Alpha and Beta, you had an instinctual understanding of what people think of when they hear ‘alpha’ and what people think of when they hear ‘beta.’ When people hear ‘alpha’ – the descriptions that come to mind are ‘assertiveness, leadership, go-getter, confident.’ When people hear ‘beta’ the descriptions that come to mind are ‘meekness, timidity, follower, nervous, etc.’ One conjures images of something positive, while the other conjures up images of something negative…without having to each time make a LIST of those things.

Also my post had absolutely nothing to do with sexism, or even science. It was literary short-hand.

I swear, it gets me how people love to try to attack me every time I post anything, and misread it in the worst possible light. :/

“In my experience, it turns out that the shorthand of using the commonly understood meanings of “alpha and beta males” actually takes more time due to the cost of the requisite sentences it takes afterward to establish that yes you are using those terms but you are not in fact a sexist scumbag.”

Or you could just read my posts instead of just read a couple of words in order to try some sort of ‘virtue signalling’ method of arguing. Reading comprehension goes a long way. Given how long my posts tend to be, exactly how much longer would you like them to become? Not only is it clear what I was saying by using the terms ‘alpha’ and ‘beta’ – I even prefaced it in the exact damned post previously, almost as if I had some sort of precognitive ability to know that people would read those words and try to use them to ignore the merits of the post.

“Really, “assertive”, “socially forward” versus “introverted”, “shy”… it’s not like any language lacks the appropriate descriptors for behaviors pertaining to social behavior, and people understand it just the same. No need to list things every time.”

Um… read my other posts. I’ve used those words repeatedly actually prior to that post. Just saying alpha/beta was a good shorthand so I don’t have to keep repeating a bunch of descriptions. You clearly know what I was actually meaning. I don’t have to actually defend what I was meaning. It doesn’t make an argument against my post stronger.

Not to mention I wasn’t even saying anything particularly controversial this time. Hell, when I called Clevin a corgi, that seemed to go over quite well. Would you prefer corgi and pit bull, or would I get people railing against me saying how pitbulls are unfairly maligned?

Clevin is a social intelligence level of a corgi. Max and Patrick are pit bulls. Or dobermans. Or whatever other type of aggressive take charge dog you’d like to use. Although using dogs… that’s almost like talking about ‘pack mentality’ again.

“(And why am I not surprised Arkone is linking garbage again)”

1) cmon no ad hominem attacks. Arkone is usually really good on his arguments. What he linked is factually correct on its face when it comes to the SCIENTIFIC use of alpha and beta in respect to humans, but he’s just mis-applying it to what I said. Largely in the same way you did.

2) There’s literally not anything in this particular comic that should be that controversial to say that most people can’t agree with. Clevin’s not the type of person that gives off a leadership vibe. Max is. Patrick definitely is. Of the three, Clevin’s clearly the nicest person and the only person who doesn’t have multiple negative character faults that I can see… he’s just not the most ‘alpha’ person when it comes to leadership, and I am not saying alpha as a scientific experiment. I’m saying it so I don’t have to describe every description that comes to mind when a person says alpha or beta.

“And you say that there are different types of intelligence and that’s exactly my point: Clevin’s people skills imply very little about his capacity to understand the consequences of his behavior, so when I said above that “he’s not stupid” about that, using his lack of natural charisma as a counterpoint is not super relevant.”

It was relevant to me because you were using stupid in order to describe intelligence as it relates to picking up on social queues. Clevin misses big flashing signs there with how chipper he is to Patrick leading up to what just happened. 🙂

You really have a problem with attacking terms while ignoring the message being explained to you. Although you are doing what is considered ‘virtue signalling’ yes. And now you’re virtual signalling by attacking my saying that you’re virtual signalling. That’s like… extra levels of meta-virtue signalling.

How about, for a change, you actually debate on the topic, rather than blocking people or personal attacks and ad hominems? It would probably be a lot more productive. Not that anything I said about Clevin in the first place was worthy of being attacked in any way to begin with.

And no, I’m not Arkone. Although I’m thinking that you believe that anyone who has a different opinion than you, or thinks you should not attack Arkone or other people with ad hominem attacks, is probably the same person. Unfortunately there is more than one person who has an opinion that is different than yours.

Also not his soulmate. We disagree on stuff too. But at least he argues civilly and remains on the topic.

“Okay, here’s a lesson then.”

Despite not asking for a lesson from you, and despite not thinking you’re someone qualified in any academic capacity to give me a lesson….

“When you say “you my good Sir are virtue signaling!””

Didn’t say that. Read my post again. You don’t seem to ever read what I say. You just focus on one or two buzzwords and run with that because it’s easier than actually engaging in critical thinking. You do ad hominem and strawman attacks rather than intellectual debate. I even go out of my way to explain the context in which I use these buzzwords, and you seem to gloss over it.

“Yes, the fascists edgelords who invented the term on 4chan a few years ago didn’t give a damn about the /inherent incoherent hypocrisy/ that it’s always “virtue signaling” to call out “virtue signaling”, because their goal is to disrupt conversations, troll and overwhelm with bullshit.”

Literally no idea what this has to do with me or my posts about Patrick, Max, and Clevin. You’re just aching for a fight so you can oppose the oh-so-scary Lisa Izo (as if I have any notoriety to begin with, I’m a random person on the interwebs) by using strawman positions and ad hominem attacks over a thread which was utterly harmless and inoffensive about how Clevin is meek and timid in most of his opinions regarding Alison and her circle, while Patrick and Max are assertive and/or aggressive in their opinions. God, so much easier to describe that as just saying ‘alpha’ and ‘beta.’

And now you’ll probably not read this post either and latch onto alpha/beta again.

“That’s the same kind of assholes who recently came out with “cuck” for instance”
I’ve literally never used that word. Not to mention I voted libertarian, not Trump. Pretty sure that the reason it’s used though is because the word that it’s slang for, cuckold, describes someone who is extremely meek and timid, although with sexual connotations. Probably the fact that it also rhymes with a swear word helps encourage the use of that word as a personal attack.

“and they are also mostly to blame for the perpetuation of “alpha and beta males””

Actually alpha and beta are terms that have been used for a LONG time before the word ‘cuck’ (hate how that word sounds btw, just sounds sexually offensive to me). Alpha and Beta have even been used for centuries before the studies that Arkone mentioned, in referencing any group that operates on a pack mentality when hunting. Alpha and Beta did not start on 4chan. I’ve never even been on 4chan. To be honest I’m not entirely sure what 4chan is, except I’ve always assumed it’s like reddit or funnyjunk or instagram or /pol/ or webcomic forums – internet websites or chat boards.

“they are also mostly to blame for the perpetuation of “alpha and beta males” because it’s the model by which they grow their numbers,”

Read above. Alpha and Beta were used for centuries before 4chan. And even in modern times, it’s been used in Hollywood all over the place. Hell, it was used on Star Trek Voyager by the Hirogen (who are pack hunters as well), or by the Dominion when showing how the Vorta interact with the Gem Hadar (and how the Gem Hadar do their own internal hierarchies – although they say ‘First’ and ‘Second’ instead of Alpha and Beta).

“All of this is the worst kind of wretch and I will never “debate” anyone using these tactics thereby approving their validity.”

I’m guessing you’re not a big fan of Star Trek or White Wolf role playing games. Btw, apparently you will not ‘debate’ someone using those terms, but you will engage in ad hominem attacks. I think you’d get more respect from me and be more intellectually persuasive if you DID debate people with whom you disagree, while sticking on point of the topic being discussed, rather than what you’ve been doing. Even if I wouldn’t agree with you, I’d at least enjoy the debate. What you’re doing, though, is just the more verbose version of ‘screw you, you can’t say that.’

“It will always be intense, /vicious/ hostility toward this shit, and not for your benefit”

And this is why I described what you were doing as being virtue signalling. Because you’re clearly not posting to discuss the OP. You’re just trying to fight in order to show others who engage in your same opinions that those who have different opinions are bad people. WHich is especially odd when I’m not even talking about anything offensive – I’m talking about Clevin being meek and Patrick and Max being… not weak. Again. Alpha and Beta just relate the description soooo much easier.

“(so you can stop whining about productivity, but we’ll come back to you later)”

1) Wasn’t whining. You’re the only one who seems to be doing anything close to whining, if ANYONE was whining. Though I’m not trying to call you names.
2) When I write, I like when the discussion is productive, rather than whatever we’re talking about HERE. Which is totally unproductive.

“but for that of others reading and the whole comment section. So that it’s clear this trash isn’t welcome and will /never/ be tolerated.”

More strawmanning here and 1984 similarities here. Skipping.

“So what does that make you then?”
It makes me someone who talks consistently and logically without strawmanning, but gets roped into people like you arguing about buzzwords instead of the actual post.

“Well, you’re clearly not aware you’re doing this because you put your trash on your sleeve whereas the neonazis of 4chan know they need to be sneaky about it.”

I literally described what I maen by the words I use. You don’t seem to read it. But since you’re not debating, I guess you don’t need to read it. Well, at least you’re not calling the jewish, asian poster a neonazi. That’s something at least. Thanks?

“Don’t feel bad for buying into their rhetoric one way or another who knows where on the Internet, their rhetoric is the worst but it’s immensely effective, and the most oblivious of us can often fall prey to it.”

Actually I think the first time I ever heard ‘alpha’ and ‘beta’ was on Star Trek Voyager by the Hirogen. Oh I also think the terms were used in Supernatural for monsters, and on the TV show ‘Alphas.’

Havent ‘bought into’ anyone’s rhetoric. You seem to have bought into some rhetoric though to be getting into such a lather over words like alpha and beta.

“Likewise, our buddy Arkone (which I haven’t blocked, he blocked /me/) fell prey to antifeminist rhetoric with an air of scientific legitimacy because it spoke to his unchecked internal misogyny and his childish understanding of skepticism.”

I’ve yet to ever block anyone because I don’t care what people say about me as long as they arent actually threatening me, but if you just claim Arkone suffers from ‘internal misogyny’ (oh god if I wanted to latch onto a buzz word you’re using, I would probably latch onto that one), maybe he just didn’t see a point in talking to you. I wouldnt have done that though personally. I always talk to people with whom I disagree. It’s pretty much my entire job. And when I was in the DA’s office, my best friend was in the PD’s ofice. Although I id leave there to do intellectual property law, which doen’t usually have to deal with other people face-to-face. 🙂

That being said I’ve always found Arkone to be very respectful, even when we disagree (like about socialism as a viable political concept for the US). If you talk to him respectfully, he does the same. Same for a lot of other people – and not just people who agree with me. Loranna’s always respectful, Weatherheight’s always respectful, Kid Chaos’s always respectful, Stephanie’s been respectful (and we disagree about almost everything), etc.

I’m amazed that this discussion is happening based on my post about Clevin being a beta mentality though. So much anger over something so innocent and meaningless.

“You fell prey to harmful discourse without a thematic core because I don’t know where you glean your nonsense on the web but you forget to watch your hands when you get home. ”

Star Trek. Lets go with Star Trek.

Oh, and law. But here it’s closer to star trek.

“But his are opinions, yours are just tactics and words you don’t understand the implications of. He’s much far gone, you seem to only need better people to trust.”
I actually don’t use other people’s opinions as facts. Facts might be embedded IN people’s opinions though, and if they’re convincing enough, those facts will show through if they use logic instead of raw emotion or personal attacks. I use other people’s opinions as their opinions I trust myself. And if someone else debates me and is convincing, I might take some of their opinions and figure how they mesh with mine. When people strawman or use ad hominem attacks though, there’s no real facts within those opinions. And you’re not debating, as you’ve said.

“But I have little desire to help you if you’re not ready to help yourself first.”

Wow no offense but you’re really giving a 1984 INGSOC ‘thought police’ vibe right now. I’d say something more substantive but most of what you’ve said has had nothing to do with anything in the thread.

“That’ll come with time, either maturity or the crippling loneliness of having alienated everyone you had some esteem for.”

Most people whom I have ‘esteem’ for are people who don’t do what you’re trying to do, so I’m not worried there. And I’m friends with people who have different opinions than me but arent so arrogant and authoritarian about it. If they acted like you, I wouldn’t feel all that bad about if they don’t talk to me. Definitely wouldn’t feel lonely or alienated. Usually they seek me out for conversation because I’m not boring and I’m consistent. Not to toot my own horn.

“Call me selfish,”

I don’t call you selfish. I think you’re a bit arrogant and authoritarian though.

“but it’s not my job to salvage lost souls.”

My soul and myself are just fine where they are. Thank you. Does this mean you won’t bother to respond to me anymore with these long posts if you’re not going to try to save and convert me to the religion of Gotham? Appreciated. My computer starts to freeze up with these long posts anyway.

Wow, I literally said you were going to focus on alpha and beta again instead of the rest of the post, and you did.

My exact words in the post – “And now you’ll probably not read this post either and latch onto alpha/beta again.”

I must be clairvoyant or something.

Btw…. X-Men also uses Alpha mutants, Beta mutants, Gamma mutants and then added Omega mutants as something higher than alpha. 🙂 (although in ethology, omega isn’t the highest, it’s the lowest – Marvel gets hinky sometimes).

And yes, alpha and beta are terms that have been used in ethology for centuries. Sorry if facts are interfering with your feelings on how I’ve used the terms. I havent even used them for ethology… just as shorthand. Which I’ve now said mulitple times.

It’s almost like you don’t bother to read my posts when you respond.

I’m talking about how alpha and beta have been used in ethology, the study of human behavior and social organization from a biological perspective (also he science of animal behavior), and how today those words are most often used as shorthand for other words …. and you’re talking about it as if I’m saying the origin of actual words from latin.

Honestly the only one embarrassing themselves would be you, if you realized how far off you are missing the mark on what I post.

Please stop quoting, almost word for word, Adam Ruins Everything. It’s not doing much for your ‘millennials are not lazy’ argument.

Not to mention, once again, alpha and beta have refers to pack hunters and animals (especially in mating) terminology, for centuries. Attributing it from a scientific standpoint to humans is what happened in the 40 and 50s, which then caught on. But in both cases you’re incorrect on what I’m saying.

1) Alpha and Beta as terms relating to ethology have existed for centuries. They just didn’t exist as descriptors for humans until the 20th century, because of the Shecknel (or whatever his name is) study. Which he then said did not stand up to scientific rigor because of the possiblity that he was observing wolves as a familial unit instead of in their role as a pack. But wolves do hunt in packs. And they do choose mates based on whoever is the alpha, just as other many other species do (although Bonobos have an alpha FEMALE instead of an alpha male). Keep ignoring it if you want, but you’re wrong on how long the term has been around.

2) Quoting a TV show with quite a few problems in their reasoning isn’t actually making you look intellectual. Do some actual research from the actual studies and what actually happened. And then actually apply that information to what I actually said, and what I actually have now reiterated for 5 actual times about how I was using shorthand since you clearly do know what I am meaning when I’ve said alpha and beta. Because you’re having a visceral, hate-filled reaction to it. I dunno, maybe you consider yourself to have more traits in common with what we’d call a beta and you’re reacting defensively. Don’t know, don’t care. This is a dumb thread now.

” As dumb as “millennials are lazy” or “millennials are killing the napkin industry” or “the earth is flat”.”

If you’re an example of millenial thought, then you’re not doing the stereotype any favors with the way you’ve been arguing (or ‘not debating’ – as you described it). Also I never said anything about millennials killing the napkin industry – that just sounds like something stupid that a magazine author wrote to sell the article, like when people say ‘the eclipse from august 20 was racist’ or other BS. Also never said the Earth was flat either.

I’m just noting not only my own personal observance of others my age, but also events happening at colleges like Miss U and Evergreen and way too many other colleges lately. Or Occupy movements. Not to mention a lot of protesters my age who, when you ask them about what they’re protesting, or why they’re protesting, seem utterly incoherent as they didn’t take the time to actually learn about what they’re protesting. Like it or not, that’s the stereotype about millennials. That they’re lazy. And it’s because they’re portrayed that way by the media, and there’s an inordinate amount of people who are ‘millennials’ who seem to take things for granted and want things just given to them. I think that’s why socialist candidates like Bernie Sanders resonate with them. They’re getting offered free stuff, even though nothing is actually free. It’s why the Democratic party has drifted far away from classical liberalism and libertarianism, to the point where Libertarians find more in common now with conservtives.

“I’m sorry I’m not being civil about our intellectual debate”

Oh, I don’t think you’re sorry at all about not being civil. And calling anything from your side intellectual or a debate would be very generous, especially since you just got through saying you arent debating.

“regarding how you think the earth is flat.”

More strawman arguments of things I never even remotely said. Skipping.

“You’re making me laugh very hard”

I doubt I’m making you laugh. I’m probably infuriating you because I don’t get rattled by you and I’ve remained intellectually consistent while you keep ignoring large swaths of my posts. I think you might be gnashing your teeth when you read mine. When I read yours its more a sense of general apathy about what you’re saying, since I know you’re barely reading my posts, and just skipping to buzzwords.

“telling me it’s always a flat circles on all the images you’ve printed on paper”

More flat earth stuff? Why are you so stuck on flat earth stuff? How does anything I say remotely have to do with ‘flat earth.’ How do Clevin, Patrick, and Max have anything to do with Flat Earth? Is it because you ran out of buzzwords that I said and so now you need to use buzzwords that I did not say? Strawman + buzzwords. You’re really digging in there arent you?

“so you’re totally right”

The only thing you’ve said in any post in this thread that is correct.

“I’ve literally no idea what Adam Ruins Everything is”

Pretty sure you do since you quoted it almost exactly.

” but thanks to context clues I managed to figure out it’s a webshow ”

It’s a TV show. Which you know.

“where they proved the earth was round”

And you’re back on flat earth for some reason.

“you’re very hung up about this”

You’re the one who keeps on getting caught up on buzzwords and have an abnormal fixation on disputing the flat earth argument with someone who’s never used it and has never argued about it.

” do you have stock these idiots to justify the lengths you’re willing to go to keep being demonstrably, easily verifiably wrong?”

Is the reason you keep talking about Flat Earth because you think if you say it long enough, I’ll somehow start trying to defend Flat Earth arguments? Do you even remember what this thread was about? Would you like me to start talking about how you believe that hurricanes are sexist and the eclipse is racist and put you in that category?

Although somehow I’m not entirely sure that you don’t think those two arguments are true now…

“Wait, wait, what are you saying.”

I’m saying you don’t know how to have a coherent discussion.

“Adam Ruins Everything (a show I genuinely don’t know the first thing about, again) makes your line of reasoning confusing.”

I’m saying you quoted parts of an episode of Adam Ruins Everything.

“Are you saying they are defending or supporting flat earth theory?”

No, I’m saying you’re fixated on saying stuff about the Flat Earth argument (calling it a theory is semantically wrong since it fails after the hypothesis phase since we’ve actually SEEN the Earth from orbit and people have known the Earth was round since ancient Greece because of math).

I’m also saying you’re fixated because you keep bringing up Flat Earth despite my never having said anything about it, the topic of the thread having nothing to do with it, the buzzwords I used for alpha and beta had nothing to do with it, the show you’re quoting from in attack of ‘alpha and beta’ (of which I was using as shorthand to begin with), has nothing to do with it.

You’re making ridiculous strawmans and are a poor debater. Not that you’ve been debating because you’ve said you aren’t debating anyway.

“I mean, do you seriously expect flat earth theory to be disproved by just the one webshow?”

It’s seriously like you are in some other thread with how you respond to posts. We arent talking about Flat Earth ‘theory.’ And Adam Ruins Everything is a TV show on Tru TV, which you know since you were quoting from the show directly from the cringeworthy episode on dating.

Why are you still talking about flat earth stuff?

“When something is painfully obviously wrong it’s not just dumb shows that point it out, the knowledge can come from a wide variety of places.”

Speaking of which, this sentence of yours is just awful and incoherent. I’ve read it three times and have no idea what you’re trying to say here, but I gather that it has nothing to do with the thread, like most of the posts you’ve made since you’ve gone on the flat earth tangent that I’ve been thoroughly not participating in.

“What weird life must you lead if you think your experience of media is identical to that of others”

… It’s called MASS media for a reason.

“But also the pictures of earth from orbit are obviously fake wake up sheeple”

Annnnd again she’s going on about flat earth theory. And calling me ‘sheeple’ (and I’m assuming other people, since sheeple would imply multiple people).

Going on and on and on and on and on about flat earth – the discussion that no one is having on this page, no one’s talked about, no one wants to talk about, and that has nothing to do in any way with any conversation anyone’s even mentioned slightly (other than Gotham) on any of this webcomic’s forum. Ever.

Please stop talking about ‘Flat Earth Theory.’

This coming from the person who has done nothing but make personal attacks…. and has yet to be on topic at all.

Also you said a few times that you aren’t debating.

Well at least you’re not talking about flat earth anymore. Now you just are pretending to be me for the last several posts.

“Do you mean to tell me that you see absolutely no value in discussing nonsense the other has been painfully pushing for?”

It’s good to see that you push nonsense at least.

“Are you having a revelation right now?”

I wouldn’t call knowing that you aren’t capable of coherent posts to be a revelation. I’ve realized this since you started getting into a huff on the alpha/beta terms, and then it was cemented when you started strawmanning about flat earth stuff.

I think you’re missing some nouns in place of pronouns…

“This is amazing.”

What is amazing?

“You are so bad at this.”

Bad at what?

“It’s almost like you do it on purpose.”

Do what on purpose?

““It started there”

What started where?

“and then you did this other thing,”

What other thing?

“and I have no clue as to the logical link between the two.”

The two whats?

“Beats me!”

No comment here. Too easy.

“And here I’ll mention flat earth theory again”

Good. It’s been a few minutes without you mentioning flat earth theory.

“so I can blow Gotham’s mind later”

Are…. are you talking in the third person about yourself?

“in telling her that I actually never said this”

You told yourself? What? I’m assuming you no longer need me for this thread since you’re now arguing with yourself. Cool.

“so this citation”

What citation?

“is in fact”

Pretty sure I havent seen any facts in your posts, but okay?

“dun dun dun… all wrong”

Not sure that merited an ominous ‘dun dun dun…’ but okay?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

Oh wow you sure told me off by telling me I didn’t understand when you start talking in nonsense posts:). Gee whiz. Golly.

Btw, now we’re finally on something that resembles something that’s actually been said (the alpha and beta thing) you already admitted that I have said I used the terms as shorthand. Yknow… the thing I said I don’t know how many posts ago?

“Come on, I know you can do it. Try to concentrate. Did I ever dispute that you used the terms as shorthand?”

Actually you just started talking about flat earth rather obsessively as a strawman argument, ignoring the alpha/beta part after your first response, mainly because I responded to you. Feel free to scroll up. Then you just went back to Alpha and Beta in the last post you made an hour ago, calling it utter nonsense, which would be a non-issue if you comprehend that I was using it as shorthand.

“(Hint: I was even the one to mention the term “shorthand” first)”

Actually I was the one to mention ‘shorthand’ first. 🙂

“. First off, nope, you weren’t, literal first line. ”

Oh for crying out loud, look at the post you responded to there. I literally wrote ‘short-hand’ in the previous post.

Blah blah blah, some more attempts at being catty …

“Can I baptise you Dunning–Kruger?”
Nope. Nothing illusory about who’s been shown to be smarter in this back and forth. And there’s nothing slurring about the terms as I used them.

Anyway, I’m beginning to think the main reason you’re ‘not debating’ me for this long is you’re just waiting out the clock until comments are disabled for this page, in hopes that you’ll post last, because in your mind, the last post wins (even if pretty much all of your posts have been off-topic or just namecalling).
Am I right? 🙂

It’s becoming easier to just point out your debating flaws, since your posts don’t actually have anything substantive to say. No offense, but you’re just not a good debater when you mainly just make insults and already admitted in the first post that I didn’t do what you’ve now been trying to attack me for doing.

“Well would you look at that I was actually wrong about a thing due to poor Ctrl+F. ”
Makes provable error, then makes excuse for it.

“You’ll have to excuse me, rereading your posts is physically painful.”

Ad hominem.

“Disregard my previous “hint” then, even though that doesn’t change anything about why I take offense with your discourse.”

Special pleading.

“And I adore your awkward attempt at sweeping the entirety of my post after that under the rug as if it wasn’t cringeworthily obvious you were trying to get rid of a hot potato you can’t handle.”

Argument from adverse consequences and non-sequitur. And ad hominem.

” I don’t even think it’s because you think I’m right, it’s just because you don’t understand the things I’m saying.

Ad hominem.

“ell, I am “debating” now, Dunning-Kruger,”

Ad hominem and namecalling.

“so where’s all your unearned bravado gone?”

Begging the question and non-sequitur.

“Come on, tell me again that “alpha and beta males” are not slurs”

Special pleading and straw man tactics. Also they are not slurs, particularly in how I used them.

“so my remark doesn’t apply because you can’t conceptualize the concept of a comparison,”

Special pleading.

“/please/ this is the sweetest nectar”

Non-sequitur.

“Okay now see this is getting complicated because you’re saying such nonsense ”

Ad hominem.

“from what I’ve gleaned) considering how unlikely that sounds that someone who believes the earth is flat could be competent at… anything, really, but this is something else. ”

Back to talking about flat earth.

“Regardless, it’s more of your whining ”

Mischaracterization.

“You use antiquated, unscientific, sexist terms when it is all but unnecessary”

Strawman argument since I wasn’t using it as science. Also weasel words.

“ou keep disregarding the fact that continuing to perpetuate their use, even as shorthands, endorses and legitimizes their existence and the antiquated, unscientific, sexist undertones they carry”

Excluded middle and strawman.

“Despite your claim to not regard these terms as scientifically sound like they should never be, you keep being dismissive of the sources that questioned their legitimacy”

Observational selection, even in this very sentence.

“endorses and legitimizes their existence and the antiquated, unscientific, sexist undertones they carry”

Back to ad hominem and weasel words.

“Your distilled opinions about millennials and every unearned rant going along with them are really, really fucked up (care to elaborate about Bernie Sanders?)”

Non-sequitur and ad hominem.

“You think the earth is flat”

And back to flat earth argument again.

Except that nothing I said was false. Perhaps you should stick to just namecalling again. Also for someone so dull, I seem to be someone you can’t help but respond to every time I post 🙂

Uh… intentionally misleading words or terms, making a vague claim that you’re trying to put forth as meaningful. Are you unclear that you’ve done that? Antequated? Wow. Just… wow.

Not to mention that every time you try to go off on a tangent, it’s because you’re trying to evade any sort of direct statements to my posts.

“Look at this five dimensional ourobouros.”

Seriously, who talks like this? Who makes insults like this?

” You don’t know what weasel words mean”

I literally just gave you the exact definition of ‘weasel words’ in my previous post.

“and you think it means “words I don’t understand””

No, I actually just explained to you in the previous post what it means. Reading comprehension is a good thing to have.

“so you put it after every word you don’t understand.”

Actually i only used it when you were using weasel words. Honestly, judging from this thread, I’m pretty sure I’m a lot smarter than you are. No offense.

“Gaaah—”

So…. does that mean you’ll stop responding to my posts or will I be hearing more of your very odd insults about flat earthers and five dimensional ourobori?

“Copypasting a definition doesn’t make you understand a word you use ”

… weasel words don’t mean ‘words you don’t understand.’ Geez. They mean misleading words or terms used to make a vague term seem meaningful when it’s not. And that wasn’t cut and paste. That’s just the common definition that everyone would know. Except you, apparently.

And still accepting that you use ad hominem and non-sequiturs as your go-to debating tactics, I see.

“wow, antiquated! Whatever might that mean?!”

You used it as a vague and ambiguous term, trying to fake being meaningful when you’re not even remotely so, one second claiming that alpha and beta are a recent and disproven term that have not been used for centuries, while at the same time saying that they’re ‘antequated.’

“Weasel words defense, protect me from evil”.

I don’t think you’re evil. I just don’t think you’re particularly intelligent when it comes to debate. And you’re a bit petty, which is why you resort to all the ad hominems. Not even sure why you keep posting back when each time you claim you’re not going to anymore. I must really get under your skin for some reason. Go figure.

“It’s actually using it appropriately that does.”

Absolutely no idea what this sentence means because it’s incoherent.

“even your use of strawman is so liberal as to make it pretty damn suspicious you don’t know what it means.”

Your entire ‘flat earth’ rant is a strawman argument.

“Also, will you seriously stop pondering in awe in front of every turn of phrase you encounter?”

I’m just amazed sometimes that you keep arguing about things that have nothing to do with my posts, every single time.

“Do you seriously think it doesn’t make you sound stupid to unironically act like Drax from Guardians of the Galaxy?”

More ad hominem attacks. Yawn. Sort of beginning to see why Arkone muted you. I won’t though. I’m fine with being the subject of contempt from someone I don’t respect.

“Make a goddamn effort if you want me or anyone else to do the same.”

To see you actually put effort or coherent thought or anything related to the posts that you respond to into your own posts would be astounding. So far you haven’t. You just ramble on and make insults because you can’t just have a normal, rational discussion. To the point that you’ve now been doing that on this thread for days.

“What. And I’m incoherent?”

Yes, you’re extremely incoherent.

“And calling my use of the flat earth thing a strawman argument is, shocker, hazardously lopsided”

You argue against something idiotic which I’ve never even mentioned in order to be on the winning side of an argument (for once). But you’re not arguing against me. You’re arguing against a strawman that you’ve fashioned in my place because MY arguments are not as simple to debate, or require ability than you seem capable of without resorting to emotional outbursts or insults.

Also the rest of your sentence is, again, incoherent. Sentence structure – please.

“Also it’s fascinating how you manage to believe you have moral high ground”

Feel free to look at the thread. I respond only in kind to how you respond in intensity. And to be honest I restrain things I’d say if I wasn’t trying to get a rational debate going. But you just don’t – you keep insulting, which means there’s no discussion to be had – the only thing I have to respond to are your insults and poor debating techniques.

“when you’ve been (trying to be) just as condescending as I’ve been”
Well at least you admit that you’re condescending. I’ve actually been trying to NOT be condescending, but you just don’t seem to use any substance in your posts to which I can respond. It’s always ad hominems, strawmen, catty personal attacks, etc. You initiate them. I respond.

“and it takes two people to keep a conversation going”

This hasn’t been a conversation since like… the third or fourth post, after which you got all ‘flat-earthy’ and ‘you’re a doomed soul.’

“I am indeed very petty with vile idiots”

Seriously, who say stuff like this? Vile idiots? This is like b-list comic book talk. But yes, you’re petty. And you show it when you call people vile idiots and flat earthers and racists and misogynists and ‘Dunning-Kuger and , my personal favorite, five dimensional ouroboros.

“but at least I’m honest, ”

Only about the fact that you’re petty and you don’t bother to debate (before you started claiming you were).

“try it sometime.”

I’ve been quite honest this entire time. 🙂

“…Oh, wow. She’s STILL harping on me? I can’t see a word she’s saying because I blocked her for the constant attacks and claiming that every single post I made was proof of my being a sexist misogynistic entitled scumbag”

She made one sentence saying that you were linking garbage when you responded to my using the terms ‘alpha male’ and ‘beta male.’ I didnt think they were garbage. They’re just not on point to how I was using the terms.

“You’re very intelligent, you’re well informed, and when I think you’re mistaken about something or misinformed I respond to the argument, the way you do in turn”
Yes I know. I don’t have a problem with your posts. No worries.

“also: pit bulls are not inherently aggressive. They’re actually naturally sweet and loving, like any other dog – if anything, smaller dogs tend to be more aggressive because their owners ignore misbehavior that seems “cute.””

Yeah, I’m again just using the word pit bull because of what the word conjures up in the minds of most people. Aggressive and dangerous, as opposed to corgi, who are harmless. Since you never heard of a corgi biting a person ‘s face off, even if they were treated badly.

In actuality, there are no bad doggos.

They’re good dogs, Brent.
https://media0ch-a.akamaihd.net/45/53/f569ec879c016db4ad8fe5bfb471e62e.jpg

I wish we were the same person. I’d love to have an attorney’s income. Amazon keeps screwing over authors and we’re still looking at better outlets for marketing and distribution… >.>

“Wait… the “Alpha male/beta male” crap? ”

Arkone, I did tell you to ignore the Adam Ruins Everything episode 🙂 When I was referring to alpha male beta male I’m not talking scientific analogies. I’m just talking bout the concept of leaders and followers in general. I’m not trying to write a thesis or a scientific rule of social behavior like Schnenkel was.

Also the Adam Ruins Everything episode on that was woefully cherry-picked. If you’d prefer I say ‘leaders’ and ‘followers’ I’ll say that instead.

Max and Patrick are leader mentalities with high opinions of their own self-worth. Clevin is a follower mentality, with an extremely low opinion of his self worth. Does that work better than using the terminology that I was trying to avoid in the first place?

Would you prefer other general terminology for the types of cliques these two types of people would be in? Jocks and Nerds? Prom Queen and Wallflower? Bart Simpson and Milhouse?

Or how about I just use a page from Futurama and say Sharks or Sheep? Max and Patrick are sharks. Clevin’s a sheep. Plug in Shark and Sheep where I wrote Alpha and Beta. Same result. 🙂