philosoraptor
No bio...
User ID: 285
That reason was just bad, as it excluded the option of "AF was confident in his interpretation, so he didn't ask".
Thus, my calling it "extremely weak circumstantial evidence". (It's not, for example, like he caught Arjin in a contradiction or anything like that.) I think we're agreeing on the basic facts and just assigning somewhat different descriptions to them.
but I do not believe this for reasons I explained in my other post
You did not explain your reasons for thinking he was lying, or at best you gave some extremely weak circumstantial evidence of this, before moving on to your main topic which was psychologizing about why. It was actually one of the better examples of Bulverism I've seen here.
To be absolutely clear and direct, I did not say, did not mean, and do not believe " if you think the "Braveheart" narrative is likely to be true, and remain unmoved by official government statements, it's because you hate brown people."
As a relatively neutral observer, I honestly have no idea how else your post can be interpreted. This just seems to be the straightforward meaning of your words. A lot of people seem to have come to that exact conclusion, and no-one - yourself included - has offered a plausible alternative reading. At the very least, your intended meaning and how it differs from what's quoted above is clearly nowhere near as obvious as you seem to think.
An explanation of what you did mean would be the obvious next step, well before calling people liars for believing the words in front of them meant what they appeared to say. Especially coming from a (soon-to-be-ex?) moderator.
- Prev
- Next

Yes, I did. I made a few changes in the first few minutes, after realizing my initial version was much harder on Amadan than it needed to be and not really fair. And if you were responding to that version of my post, your response was wholly appropriate and captured some of the reasons I was editing it at that moment.
More options
Context Copy link