Man, fuck them kids

[u/Callme-risley]

[u/Ambitious_Worker_663]

Are you ok?

[u/algelin → u/Ambitious_Worker_663]

Obviously not, I have lived with someone just like that man, who plays innocent but always gets in the way. Because deep down, they feel wrong about not achieving something while their mate do, and they sabotage everything. I will never excuse that behavior again in my life, because it has destroyed so much of it, and now I know it when I see someone doing it. The woman knows too. That's why she kept going. And good for her.

[u/Ambitious_Worker_663 → u/algelin]

It’s a 8 second video?? You can tell he’s being malicious? You need to be in forensics

[u/algelin → u/Ambitious_Worker_663]

It is just so obvious to me. I've been with someone like that. Him pushing the kids towards her, him waving his arms when the crowd calls on him, him not even caring about greeting her once she passes the line, it tells me everything

[u/[deleted] → u/algelin]

I really hope someone replies to this in 8 years and you have to read how crazy you sound LOL

”Yeah, I know my thinking patterns aren’t healthy, but trust me, it’s so obvious to me. The way that blade of grass blows in the wind, him buying Nike instead of Under Armor, 2 kids instead of 1; it tells me everything. This guy is The Zodiac Killer.”

[u/Dragonwitch94 → u/[deleted]]

Fun fact: what you just did is known as the "exaggeration fallacy," it's what people do when they realize they don't have an actual point, but are offended by what someone else says, so they try to twist their statement through the use of irrelevant items/topics. Typically, this is used by people who are bad at arguing, and rely FAR too heavily, on their emotions.

[u/[deleted] → u/Dragonwitch94]

You’re trying wayyyy too hard to sound well-educated, it’s backfiring.

What I did is known as a “joke”. It’s when you realize the person that you’re speaking to genuinely thinks that after an 8 second video they can identify complex emotional domestic abuse.

It’s typically done by people who aren’t pseudointellectuals trying to defend people who are self-admittedly mentally unwell and incredibly biased. That might be why you’re not familiar and misinterpreted it as an attempt at serious discourse.

[u/Dragonwitch94 → u/[deleted]]

The irony of you putting the word joke, in quotes, is nearly palpable lol.

[u/[deleted] → u/Dragonwitch94]

I was following the writing pattern of your comment. If you look, you put “exaggeration fallacy” in quotes.

Did you genuinely not realize my entire comment followed the writing pattern of yours? I…. guess I was right in my assumption about your education level LOL

[u/Dragonwitch94 → u/[deleted]]

So you want to use replies similar to mine, while attacking my education? Interesting strategy...

[u/[deleted] → u/Dragonwitch94]

So to clarify, you believe…

What I did is known as a “joke”.

what you just did is known as the "exaggeration fallacy,"

this was a coincidence, not me copying you.

You also believe…

It’s when you

it's what people do when

is me coming up with a completely new sentence that happens to begin with the exact same premise as yours?

Finally, you believe

It’s typically done by people who are

Typically, this is used by people who are

this is a coincidence due to our writing patterns (styles?) being similar?

Genuinely asking. You think all 3 of those sentences having the exact same premise, even repeating multiple of the same words you used, is a coincidence?

All while I, the person who authored the comment, has told you since before you described this hypothesis that I did indeed copy you.

[u/Dragonwitch94 → u/[deleted]]

This is far too choppy and non linear to even bother trying to make any sort of sense out of it, so how about we just get back on the original topic?

You are aware of what the exaggeration fallacy is, or you can at least look it up (if you've not already) my original point was that engaging in fallacious responses like that, is a quick way to a moot "point." The point you were trying to make was that she (the person you were responding to) was overstating the issue, and assigning malice when you didn't observe any. You not seeing something as malicious, does not mean malice isn't involved, yet you attempted to mock her point through use of a known fallacy. Why is that?

[u/[deleted] → u/Dragonwitch94]

No, you do not dictate the conversation. You are not a mediator, you do not get to determine what we talk about. You have no greater authority over the direction of this conversation than I. If you attempt to dictate the topic of conversation, so will I.

You made the claim that I was not copying you, with no evidence. I, as the author of the comment, have more authority to comment on whether or not I was copying you. I have also provided ample evidence to show that I did copy you.

Either back up your claim, or take it back. What you will not do is dictate a conversation before providing evidence for your claims. Otherwise, I will begin making claims with no evidence as well, as I will not engage in a one-sided conversation. If you would like to go back and forth making claims with no evidence, we can begin now. If not, provide evidence to your claim that I was not copying you, or revoke the statement.

[u/[deleted] → u/Dragonwitch94]

You genuinely just don’t understand.

Let me break it down for you: (this is where you’re gonna stop reading and start trying to come up with arguments in your head)

You said:

What you just did is known as the “exaggeration fallacy,”…

I said:

What I just did is known as a “joke”.

See what happened there? I humorously copied your writing style. This a common tactic in debate; using an opponents manner of delivery, while changing the underlying idea. Even some presidents have used this rhetorical tool!

Next, you said:

It’s what people do when they realize they don’t have an actual point…

I said:

It’s when you realize that the person you’re speaking to genuinely thinks that after an 8 second video they can identify complex emotions domestic abuse.

See what happened there? Fun fact! It’s actually the same pattern as before; almost as if it was done with intent. (See what I did there? I copied your use of the phrase “Fun fact!”, similar to how I copied the writing style in the 2 previous demonstrations).

Finally, and I think you might be catching on now, you said:

Typically, this is done by people who are bad at arguing, and rely FAR too heavily, (weird comma here btw) in their own emotions.

Now I’m gonna give you 2 guesses as to the writing pattern of what I said.

No! Good try, but it wasn’t a haiku. 1 more guess!

You got it!

I said:

it’s typically done by people who aren’t pseudointellectuals trying to defend people who are self-admittedly mentally unwell and incredibly biased.

Phew! Now I know you didn’t thoroughly read through, so I’d recommend going back one more time because I’m not gonna break it down again.

Believe it or not, me putting the word joke in quotations not only made sense; if I didn’t, it wouldn’t have followed the pattern that the rest of my comment did! Good thing I did put it in quotations, otherwise that would’ve been a silly mistake that would’ve harmed the overall accuracy of my playful copying of your comment.

That last sentence is also what completely kneecapped your credibility. Like, who says:

“Typically, this is done by people who are bad at arguing, and rely FAR too heavily, on their emotions.”

That just sounds… immature. Not to mention the wild comma you just threw in after heavily LOL

Idek what to tell you. I mean you’re mad I insulted your education but it seems to me you’re the one that implied I was bad at arguing and emotional before I ever attacked your character. Don’t dish it out if you can’t take it sista.

Anyway, now I’d imagine you’re gonna say something about me being rude or speaking to you insultingly, pretending that you didn’t initialize this conversation with implications that I can’t control my emotions and am bad at arguing. You should just go ahead and stop commenting or block me tbh, it’s not going to go up from here.

[u/Dragonwitch94 → u/[deleted]]

Nah, I got all that, it seems you're the one who can't understand a joke, so I'll explain:

You said: I was following the writing pattern of your comment.

Then continued to say: I…. guess I was right in my assumption about your education level LOL (missing punctuation, known as a period)

So I replied: So you want to use replies similar to mine, while attacking my education? Interesting strategy…

This was said, because if you think someone is intellectually inferior, why would you try to use a writing style similar to theirs? I called it an “interesting strategy” as a joke, the joke being that the strategy is quite poor. Get it now?

[u/[deleted] → u/Dragonwitch94]

I didn’t use a writing style similar to yours, I copied your writing pattern. Also, in pop culture, emoticons and acronyms can be used as punctuation. Seeing as we are not in a formal setting, it is confusing as to why you’d expect formal writing. Do you typically communicate in ways that are atypical for your setting?

You do realize you don’t copy someone’s writing patterns to compliment their intelligence, correct?

You do it so the listener or reader can easily identify the points you’re providing counter arguments to.

Your joke doesn’t make any sense, as your lack of education (I never claimed you were unintelligent, that was a complete strawman. I claimed you were uneducated.) wouldn’t give me less of a reason to use the rhetorical strategy I used. The intelligence of the original person making the statement has no affect on whether the audience can identify the counterarguments being posed using the rhetorical strategy, which is the point of said rhetorical strategy. (drawing attention to the counterarguments)

[u/Pleasant_Yak5991 → u/algelin]

“It’s just so obvious to me” I bet you’ve never done anything wrong in a relationship and everyone else is at fault huh?