[eDebate] Um...Topicality still sucks

LACC Forensics forensics
Fri Jun 1 22:53:41 CDT 2007


Adam writes...

>You know what's pathetic "Ken"?

>A grown ass man wasting time making irrelevant posts about three days after
>the discussion started, and pretended like he knew what was going on.

What did I miss? You and Andy both make reference to the fact that it took
me a few days to comment on your post. I've caught up - read every post on
the thread and I don't see anything that makes my response irrelevant. Were
you just quoting Andy?

>Very pathetic indeed...and pretty funny to me.

>Why can I (a black kid from Baltimore who goes to Towson) decide what's
>important? Just like Andy said, I'm human, and I get to do that, just like
>you get to decide what to debate, and like the topic committee decides what
>the topic is (duh).

Who missed the point? First of all, WTF does the fact that you are "(a black
kid from Baltimore who goes to Towson)" have to do with anything I said? The
very clear implication of your statement that there are more important
things to debate than topicality is that you get to decide for OTHERS what
is most important. I agree completely that you get to decide what's most
important to you, my question was why you get to do so for everyone else?
Neither you nor Andy make any attempt to answer that question.

>It only proves my underlying point that Topicality isn't worth talking about
>when I say something like "Topicality doesn't exist in the English
>dictionary" and you waste time (and a paragraph) giving me the logic of
>words and their application.

I guess you need more than a paragraph because I cannot find anything in
this one that serves as support for your conclusion that I somehow proved
your point that topicality isn't worth debating - and you certainly still
haven't done so. 

>HA! Looks like you missed the point. >

>When I said "Fuck the Topic", I can bet any amount of money that a good
>percentage of the people that actually take the time to sort through these
>posts laughed, chuckled, giggled, thought about, or at least thought "That
>was funny" without laughing. While you actually took me seriously.
>tisk...tisk...all that debate experience and no sense of humor.

Indeed I did miss the humor. Are you trying to be funny in this post as
well? All I can gather from this is that anyone who doesn't have YOUR sense
of humor has NO sense of humor. I have to admit that your presentation "9-2"
was kind of funny, however, the humor was lost on me by the fact that I am
pretty sure you meant it when you said "fuck the topic."

>So how about next time you "weigh in" you post something that adds to the
>discussion that's relevant...guy.

I started this thread because a number of people bitched about debating
topicality and I honestly wanted to understand their objections. Your
responses did absolutely nothing to answer that question. So, who's being
irrelevant?




More information about the Mailman mailing list