Support NeoGAF

[ZAK]

Take opinions and treat them as fact. Obvious fact.

Claim the other guy knows you're right and is just lying to himself.

Insist they don't know what they're talking about ("armchair _" works great) but refuse to elaborate except with insults.

Insults.

Make some ridiculous rebuttal and act like it's a decisive and flawless victory for you. For extra credit, never make an attempt to argue again.

 

[sleeping_dragon]

AUS GAF should know about Julia Gillard, be an obnoxious monotone red head succubus and just talk loud and over the top of everyone when they are trying to talk..... makes me wanna choke the bitch.

John, just let it go man, u too old for this shit.

 

[Brannon]

Go into Scientology. They are masters.

holy shit I complimented those bastards...

 

[Perspicacity]

"Well I had sex with your wife"

 

[Callo Merlose]

Umm yeah, creating a thread for the sole purpose of attacking religion (Christianity) is wrong buddy. Why not attack other religions too? Oh yeah, I forgot...because this is the U.S. and it's a-ok to attack Christians but nobody else.

Romans 13:12

"Small a man is he who attacks those who mean him no harm."

:lol

 

[sedaku]

Occasionally you come across an opponent in debate who is pretty difficult to reason with.

In these cases, you are better off just trolling the opponent and pissing him/her off, because to try to debate intelligently will only lead to frustration...

So...let's post tactics on how to piss people off in debate here.

My favorite: Repeated straw man attacks. These are by far the most common(and most annoying). Purposely misrepresent your opponents viewpoint, then attack that misrepresentation relentlessly.

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid and pathetic.
Why do you feel the need to pissing them off anyway?
Are you so insecure about yourself that you have to win no matter what, even if it means lowering yourself for some false sense of victory ?

 

[OnkelC]

"You remind me of myself when I was young and stupid" after the opponents argument usually does the trick for me.

 

[Haunted]

"You remind me of myself when I was young and stupid" after the opponents argument usually does the trick for me.

Don't forget the small pause between young.... and stupid. It's important.

 

[Kipe]

Occasionally you come across an opponent in debate who is pretty difficult to reason with.

In these cases, you are better off just trolling the opponent and pissing him/her off, because to try to debate intelligently will only lead to frustration...

So...let's post tactics on how to piss people off in debate here.

My favorite: Repeated straw man attacks. These are by far the most common(and most annoying). Purposely misrepresent your opponents viewpoint, then attack that misrepresentation relentlessly.

If you consistently use straw man attacks you'll just get called out on it and it makes you look dumb. Unless your goal is being a joke character, it's really pointless using these attacks. At first people took Fox News seriously because they had the backing of a major corporation, but now it's pretty ridiculous to call them a news organization anymore after they've consistently used the similar childish tactics during debates.

 

[Anno]

If arguing with someone about anything Biblical I just keep asking "Why?" or "How do you know that?". It generally pisses people off pretty quickly.

 

[slider]

This is quite useful!

Lengthy but worth a look.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

call them nintards ninthings and say waggle alot

 

[Groder Mullet]

How to Win Arguments, As It Were

Use meaningless but weightly-sounding words and phrases.

Memorize this list:

* Let me put it this way
* In terms of
* Vis-a-vis
* Per se
* As it were
* Qua
* So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as ``Q.E.D.,'' ``e.g.,'' and ``i.e.'' These are all short for ``I speak Latin, and you do not.''

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say: ``Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money.''

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say: ``Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D.''

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

 

[Meloche]

Couldn't find a clip, but this will have to do:

Nick Naylor: That's the beauty of argument, if you argue correctly, you're never wrong.
Joey Naylor: ...so what happens when you're wrong?
Nick Naylor: -Whoa, Joey I'm never wrong.
Joey Naylor: But you can't always be right...
Nick Naylor: -Well if it's your job to be right, then you're never wrong.
Joey Naylor: But what if you are wrong?
Nick Naylor: -OK, let's say that you're defending chocolate, and I'm defending vanilla. Now if I were to say to you: 'Vanilla is the best flavour ice-cream', you'd say:
Joey Naylor: No, chocolate is.
Nick Naylor: Exactly, but you can't win that argument... so, I'll ask you: so you think chocolate is the end all and the all of ice-cream, do you?
Joey Naylor: It's the best ice-cream, I wouldn't order any other.
Nick Naylor: -Oh! So it's all chocolate for you is it?
Joey Naylor: Yes, chocolate is all I need.
Nick Naylor: Well I need more than chocolate, and for that matter I need more than vanilla. I believe that we need freedom. And choice when it comes to our ice-cream, and that Joey Naylor, that is the defintion of liberty.
Joey Naylor: But that's not what we're talking about
Nick Naylor: -Ah! But that's what I'm talking about.
Joey Naylor: ...but you didn't prove that vanilla was the best...
Nick Naylor: I didn't have to. I proved that you're wrong, and if you're wrong I'm right.
Joey Naylor: But you still didn't convince me
Nick Naylor: It's that I'm not after you. I'm after them." ***Points into the crowd***

Do this!

 

[pel1300]

If you consistently use straw man attacks you'll just get called out on it and it makes you look dumb. Unless your goal is being a joke character, it's really pointless using these attacks. At first people took Fox News seriously because they had the backing of a major corporation, but now it's pretty ridiculous to call them a news organization anymore after they've consistently used the similar childish tactics during debates.

Actually the goal IS to be a joke character, just in a more subtle way.

The sad thing about fox news it that - many people sitting in their homes watch them debate and do take them seriously.

 

[pel1300]

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid and pathetic.
Why do you feel the need to pissing them off anyway?
Are you so insecure about yourself that you have to win no matter what, even if it means lowering yourself for some false sense of victory ?

I think you need a hug... :lol

It's not so much about wanting to win so much as it is to just have fun getting a rise out of uptight people who take themselves too seriously. *cough* like yourself *cough*

Some people also have a way of creating confusion in an argument...their thoughts go all over the place and both parties forget how the **** the debate moved so far off topic...these people are also good targets for such trolling.

 

[Count Dookkake]

My favorite trick is to keep asking questions until the opponent gives two answers that are contradictory. Then I restate their earlier position ("I recall hearing that...") which they have just contradicted.

If that doesn't work, just lay out some ostentatious farts.