lolgaxe wrote:
You should look up what that means. It means you corrected something in the quoted selection that was in error.
Yes. You incorrectly wrote the fallacious argument people were making in this thread. I helpfully corrected that mistake for you.
You can thank me later.
Quote:
Seeing as how your entire argument on your writing ability is "Everywhere else your writing skills are considered much better than almost everyone on Zam," you didn't actually fix anything.
Your first mistake (of many) is assuming that that's my "entire argument". That's not my argument at all. I was making an argument about something completely unrelated right up until the moment when those I was arguing against decided to side track the whole thing into a discussion about my writing skills. That's
their argument. Perhaps you should examine their argument with the same keen eye for fallacy first. Just a suggestion.
Hence my correction. That's the fallacy you should have started with. My response was simply to point out that the posters here do not represent anywhere near a sufficiently large (much less unbiased) audience of my writing to make a fair and accurate assessment of my abilities. Is that not correct? So why does it matter if "everyone else" agrees with me or not? What matters it that "not everyone" agrees with those making claims on this forum about my writing skills.
Do you see yet how you have the whole thing backwards?
Quote:
Like I said in that post you didn't read, a good writer knows their audience and adjusts accordingly. Your refusal to adjust, and in fact vehemently criticize others and dismiss them for not praising you, is the very definition of a lousy writer.
If my objective were to get you guys to buy copies of my books, you'd have a point. But this isn't an audience. This is an interactive communication medium. When you say I refuse to "adjust accordingly", you're not talking about writing style though. I could be just as long winded, but if I were a liberal and this long winded, and as passionate about my positions, the majority of the posters on this forum would love me. Not just a little bit, but I'd be proclaimed as the best, smartest, sexiest, etc advocate for the liberal causes around. You'd all worship at my feet.
Of course, what you argue I should do isn't going to happen. So I guess you'll just have to live with that. Ok?
Quote:
You're welcome to keep telling us how "everywhere else, where biased perceptions aren't the rule of the day, your writing skills are objectively considered much much better than at least 90% of the posters here," if it makes you feel better, though. At least one person believes it, even if that one person is yourself.
I'm sure that self reflection isn't one of your strong suits, and honesty about said reflections even less so, but you have to know that the objections to my writing "style" have far far less to do with the actual style, as to the content. You don't have an issue with how I say things. You don't really have an issue with the length of my posts. You have an issue with *what* I say. You just find it easier to attack the style and then length than the actual meaning and message.
And no matter how much you may deny that publicly, it's pretty abundantly apparent that this is the case. I'm sure you'll pat yourself on the back, and those of like mind will join you in refuting my words, but it's got to be pretty hollow for you. You know I'm right. All those joining you in your loudly laughing (at my expense, as you'll make abundantly clear) have to know that you're lying. Somewhere inside you know that it's all an act. You can lie to me. You can lie to the readers of this forum. But you really can't lie to yourself, can you?
I don't worry much about what other random people on the interwebs think of me. But apparently, you place great stock in it. Your choice, I suppose. But you can only eventually lose that game. You have to know that. You're the only one who cares about the outcome.
Edited, Feb 17th 2012 6:13pm by gbaji 
