Well, if you carefully read what he's saying, the idea is that he lies about being good at debate, while not exactly understanding what proof, argument or knowledge mean. But he has an IQ of 160 (I think that's what he said), so maybe we just cannot grasp his level of thought.
During one of my classes of German, one of the lead speech and debate members was going on in how good he is at debate. Me, being the smug prick that I am, decided to take him up on his offer. So our teacher was disscussing how laws differ from the US and Germany. The guy (his name is Cory) said that most of the ethics between the two nations are rational, and I agreed with him. Next, she told us a story between a A man, a woman, and a house keeper involved with a murder. Long story short, we picked the obvious one at of the 3 that the person who did it was the house keeper.
Now here comes the kicker. We headed towards English class and about half way through the class the question was asked: "Do morals influence arguments?"
He said yes, and I said no.
Now, his argument was that morals should come into play from a view point of certain things such as petty crime and acts of violence. I countered with the fact this was arguments, not law. He retorted by saying that you should treat any sort of law as a basis for arguments. I said no, you're dodging the argument.
Then it got heated, he kept saying things like "Well if morals don't influence our laws, then how can we be sure our laws are morally just?" To which I said, "I don't dwell with maybes, I only dwell in facts."
I got him there, and he just went silent.
Next day, went to german class again. I don't remember what, but we were discussing about the holocaust and how many people where killed. I pitched in a statement that what happened during that time was unjust.
Till I get interupted by Cory and he said, "Nope, you can't say anything."
So I asked "Why?"
His response: "Nope, doesn't exist."
Now Cory only says that to people who he doesn't like, so like the gentleman that I am, I ignore him.
Few weeks go by and as I kept my guard up from my massive amount of paranoia, I notice that I was being stalked. Went to the pisser, and he followed me in.
Some guy who I never even met before in the school came up to me and said, "So I think picking on you is fun" (Paraphrasing)
To which I reply, "Why? To fuel your tiny dick syndrome?"
And like that, I get hit with a small wooden block to the back of my leg. Didn't really do much, but bounced off me and went flying underneath the stalls.
"That's a warning." He said.
Chuckling, I said, "Just like a small man to do little damage against a giant." (I'm a tall guy standing at 6'7" currently, placing me around 6'5" around this time. He was a head and a half shorter than me.)
Then, I felt a sharp pain to the back of my head. He struck me with a fist, saying "fucker" as he left.
Now I may be a sadist, but violence is not in my nature, so I did the smart thing and went to the principle and snitched out the guy. Later Cory came up and said, "So I heard you got beat up in the bathroom."
Gave me a link to the guy who I never even saw before. I also found out he went to the YES house, (our school for the *cough* "Mentally Unstable." I was there for a while due to my nature of having my shit kicked in 24/7 from gangs.)
Cory avoided me every turn he got. Whenever I would say something even during lunch, He would try to rebut me. This also effected his performance in nationals and he missed out in a scholarship.
Next Semester, the teacher in my English class came up to me and said, "You know you would do really well in Speech and Debate."
I said: "Yeah I think I would, but I rather focus on my job right now rather than doing Speech and Debate."
And that's my little story. BRB, gonna be gone for a while. Rebut if you like, I have witnesses.
When I said you have no backing for what you're saying I didn't only mean that you can't prove your stories in any way (though it's still hard, especially over the internet), I meant that your lack of understanding of debate and certain terms (and your way of argumentation) actually shows you know nothing about debate, logic or philosophy and are terrible at it.
At least one of your 'arguments' is a complete non sequitur and an empty statement, and then you appear to think that you really "told him" when you said he has a small dick. What's it with you and dick fixation? Are you gay, frustrated, sexually deviant, or something else? I mean I can understand most of those things, but the way you appear to believe that talking about genitals is a valid technique in debate is just hilarious.
Kitrak, you completely disregarded this gem, though:
"Then it got heated, he kept saying things like "Well if morals don't influence our laws, then how can we be sure our laws are morally just?" To which I said, "I don't dwell with maybes, I only dwell in facts.""
Although the question is kinda presented in a dumb way, his answer is a non-answer, rofl. How can this be a part of any kind of a debate is beyond me.
Kitrak, how did you like his "I don't dwell with maybes, I only dwell in facts." statement? Doesn't it also look really out of place considering this thread, and how he attacked sano because he thought that MAYBE sano is toxic, because he "deduced" that?
i dont really know much about this whole debate and speech stuff cuz this is american stuff, but isn't this school kinda sophist-like? it seems to value more winning a debate than actually achieving something through discussion
sometimes conceding your point is the correct thing
anyway im probably spouting bullshit here i dont know what exactly is debate and speech
It is kinda sophist in a way, but if your opponents are any good they'll tear you a new one and you won't be able to use empty statements/obvious non sequitur/present unfalsifiable arguments as facts/etc. What this guy is saying is akin to a 1k guy having the idea he's 5k because he can stomp 1k games. He doesn't seem to understand that even if somebody told him he "won" the debate, it means jack shit if your opponent is really terribe, and this is all considering his story is true, ofc.
"who gives a fuck" is basically "how exactly is that statement relevant to the debate/question at hand?" and
"thats bullshit" is basically "you have not provided any evidence for your statement, and there's strong evidence to the contrary"
Thing about it is, I was trying to recall a story that happened 5 years ago. There maybe scruinity in my story. If I had time, I would've gone into more depth into it. (Family is visting, had to say hi.)
I agree, I lack some knowledge on how debate works, but I do use what little I know to twist and work my way around things.
@Keyboard warrior Sven guy
You proved my point just by your long LONG statement that I skimmed over. Ride that dick to the end cowboy.
"No, the issue is that you are not actively improving and you aren't playing better, meaning you have no reason whatsoever to be frustrated with other people because it's obvious you've hit your ceiling and you're the problem. So if, and since you do know this, you have no reason to be frustrated with other people. If you, on the other hand, have almost 60% winrate in your bracket, are climbing and get people who literally go 0-10 in the first 10 minutes a few games in the row, you are going to be frustrated with your teamates, since you do not do that and you actually play well for your bracket. Do you have sufficient brain power to understand what I just told you? Also it's "knows", not "know's"."
Grammar Nazi: Check
Believes in human limits: Check
No back bone theory basis claim at hand: Check
I don't know who's worst. Me or you.
"If there's one thing I loathe it's people who are obviously shitty both at the game and in life spewing shit on other people, who actually have all indications of being superior on both fields."
I agree. Apply yourself more.
"Your deduction skills are terrible, try to gather some data instead of trying to 'think' shit into existence."
Well it's already written here so...
"I don't think you know what knowledge really means, though, and for someone who appears to try to abuse philosophy to some extent, your usage and definition of it is extremely lackluster."
My philosophy is don't be ashamed of who you are. Thus, my lack of shame. I would suck your dick, but your price is probably too low for me.
"At 3k, there's enough of a big player pool that you barely ever get people 200-300 MMR bellow you. If you're 5k or close to 5k you can get matched with people who are literally 3.9k or 4.2k and compared to the skill level of a 4.8k or 5.5k player, those are terrible. You're never going to play at 3.8k and get 2.8 teammates, there are too many players in that range for that to happen. Let's not forget account buyers who run rampant in that MMR bracket."
This a valve problem and needs to be fixed. Otherwise, misdirection.
"At 4k+ sure you can. If you pick something you can't play, your fault. If you play CM while you only play two heroes, your fault. If you can't play the game at all at 4k+, still your fault because you bought the account or paid somebody to boost you, etc."
I agree, but I play like 7-8 heroes. Try to diversify my play style.
"Well, compared to you, he's Jesus."
I agree. I'm a fuck. So what?
"No, I am defending somebody against accusations that you can't make based on the available data, because you're too busy "deducing" (which, in your head, means simply making shit up). Nope, you mastered jack shit, somebody who's good at debate actually wins some and uses consistent logic, what you're doing would never pass in a real debate, since you believe that deduction means making shit up. And it's laughable that somebody who had to boast about his IQ now claims to be a giant, AND acuses others of having a huge ego. That's extremely ironic."
I accused myself of having a huge ego. You're lost there. Making shit up is different than pulling actual knowledge at the forehand. Not to mention that you just literally missed a big part of my last paragraph and decide to ignore it.
"Also, mind that I don't consider this a debate, so I am neither formal or consistent enough on my own, because there's no debate with people who are as bad at it as you are. And for someone asking for a ton of proof on easily available data, you seem to make a ton of shit up/spread obvious lies/say a lot of unfalsifiable shit without any backing. Nice job."
I consider this a circle jerk session and I'm waiting for the money shot. Also, claiming someone is bad is good enough yes, but how do you stack up to a person who knows he's bad, calls people out for having piss poor behavior if they're "Superior". I did provide proof with my text base claim and Sano's current replies and attitude seems to back me up. He's a whinner. Accept that, and get off his dick.
Also unfalsifiable was a poor choice of a word, cause you can neither claim that I'm right, or I'm wrong. Meaning, there is some truth to what I just said, making your claim to my "lies' moot.
So when a 6k player gets "team hold me back" people it's something special and when lower mmr player get those players in a lot of games nobody gives a fuck
@Kendrick Midar
"So when a 6k player gets "team hold me back" people it's something special and when lower mmr player get those players in a lot of games nobody gives a fuck"
Exactly coz the "sven guy" actually was pretty clear i belive, that at high mmr the diffrence of mmr in the same team is pretty significant, u can be matched with ppl more than 500mmr lower than u coz the high mmr dudes r extremly low percentage of playerbase, which actually holds u back coz they r worse than u. On Lower mmr however that NEVER EVER happens just coz as "sven guy" said there r way to much ppl to have a huge mmr diffrence, so the games r pretty spot on balanced in the mmr part so there no imbalance there.
I know it sounds as double standarts but actually its not, its pretty diffrent actually.
Holy shit, this neko gamer soul guy. Can't believe he is so fucking retarded. Congrats man u just wasted 15 mins of everyone's life here thanks to ur dog-bullshit comments. Ffs man try to once respect a player superior in skill to you. Or do u want to be known as 'God of making shit up' in the dotabuff community? You attention seeking fool.
Nice fuckin teams sano :D Looks like my teams most of the games, so i know how you feel.
i did it boys
god bless
reported
"id ont know what the argument here"
Well, if you carefully read what he's saying, the idea is that he lies about being good at debate, while not exactly understanding what proof, argument or knowledge mean. But he has an IQ of 160 (I think that's what he said), so maybe we just cannot grasp his level of thought.
bullying turns ppl into weebs 😕
aquila is actually pretty good on OD, thx artour
No it's 100% truth and I can prove it in this story. Sit back and enjoy the show, it's a long one.
Also: #10
During one of my classes of German, one of the lead speech and debate members was going on in how good he is at debate. Me, being the smug prick that I am, decided to take him up on his offer. So our teacher was disscussing how laws differ from the US and Germany. The guy (his name is Cory) said that most of the ethics between the two nations are rational, and I agreed with him. Next, she told us a story between a A man, a woman, and a house keeper involved with a murder. Long story short, we picked the obvious one at of the 3 that the person who did it was the house keeper.
Now here comes the kicker. We headed towards English class and about half way through the class the question was asked: "Do morals influence arguments?"
He said yes, and I said no.
Now, his argument was that morals should come into play from a view point of certain things such as petty crime and acts of violence. I countered with the fact this was arguments, not law. He retorted by saying that you should treat any sort of law as a basis for arguments. I said no, you're dodging the argument.
Then it got heated, he kept saying things like "Well if morals don't influence our laws, then how can we be sure our laws are morally just?" To which I said, "I don't dwell with maybes, I only dwell in facts."
I got him there, and he just went silent.
Next day, went to german class again. I don't remember what, but we were discussing about the holocaust and how many people where killed. I pitched in a statement that what happened during that time was unjust.
Till I get interupted by Cory and he said, "Nope, you can't say anything."
So I asked "Why?"
His response: "Nope, doesn't exist."
Now Cory only says that to people who he doesn't like, so like the gentleman that I am, I ignore him.
Few weeks go by and as I kept my guard up from my massive amount of paranoia, I notice that I was being stalked. Went to the pisser, and he followed me in.
Some guy who I never even met before in the school came up to me and said, "So I think picking on you is fun" (Paraphrasing)
To which I reply, "Why? To fuel your tiny dick syndrome?"
And like that, I get hit with a small wooden block to the back of my leg. Didn't really do much, but bounced off me and went flying underneath the stalls.
"That's a warning." He said.
Chuckling, I said, "Just like a small man to do little damage against a giant." (I'm a tall guy standing at 6'7" currently, placing me around 6'5" around this time. He was a head and a half shorter than me.)
Then, I felt a sharp pain to the back of my head. He struck me with a fist, saying "fucker" as he left.
Now I may be a sadist, but violence is not in my nature, so I did the smart thing and went to the principle and snitched out the guy. Later Cory came up and said, "So I heard you got beat up in the bathroom."
Gave me a link to the guy who I never even saw before. I also found out he went to the YES house, (our school for the *cough* "Mentally Unstable." I was there for a while due to my nature of having my shit kicked in 24/7 from gangs.)
Cory avoided me every turn he got. Whenever I would say something even during lunch, He would try to rebut me. This also effected his performance in nationals and he missed out in a scholarship.
Next Semester, the teacher in my English class came up to me and said, "You know you would do really well in Speech and Debate."
I said: "Yeah I think I would, but I rather focus on my job right now rather than doing Speech and Debate."
And that's my little story. BRB, gonna be gone for a while. Rebut if you like, I have witnesses.
honestly do you expect anybody to read that
When I said you have no backing for what you're saying I didn't only mean that you can't prove your stories in any way (though it's still hard, especially over the internet), I meant that your lack of understanding of debate and certain terms (and your way of argumentation) actually shows you know nothing about debate, logic or philosophy and are terrible at it.
At least one of your 'arguments' is a complete non sequitur and an empty statement, and then you appear to think that you really "told him" when you said he has a small dick. What's it with you and dick fixation? Are you gay, frustrated, sexually deviant, or something else? I mean I can understand most of those things, but the way you appear to believe that talking about genitals is a valid technique in debate is just hilarious.
Kitrak, you completely disregarded this gem, though:
"Then it got heated, he kept saying things like "Well if morals don't influence our laws, then how can we be sure our laws are morally just?" To which I said, "I don't dwell with maybes, I only dwell in facts.""
Although the question is kinda presented in a dumb way, his answer is a non-answer, rofl. How can this be a part of any kind of a debate is beyond me.
Kitrak, how did you like his "I don't dwell with maybes, I only dwell in facts." statement? Doesn't it also look really out of place considering this thread, and how he attacked sano because he thought that MAYBE sano is toxic, because he "deduced" that?
i dont really know much about this whole debate and speech stuff cuz this is american stuff, but isn't this school kinda sophist-like? it seems to value more winning a debate than actually achieving something through discussion
sometimes conceding your point is the correct thing
anyway im probably spouting bullshit here i dont know what exactly is debate and speech
It is kinda sophist in a way, but if your opponents are any good they'll tear you a new one and you won't be able to use empty statements/obvious non sequitur/present unfalsifiable arguments as facts/etc. What this guy is saying is akin to a 1k guy having the idea he's 5k because he can stomp 1k games. He doesn't seem to understand that even if somebody told him he "won" the debate, it means jack shit if your opponent is really terribe, and this is all considering his story is true, ofc.
"who gives a fuck" is basically "how exactly is that statement relevant to the debate/question at hand?" and
"thats bullshit" is basically "you have not provided any evidence for your statement, and there's strong evidence to the contrary"
Well, I almost got fired yesterday and was told I almost got fired on Friday too so.. I'm pretty fucked and looking for jobs again..
Have some jobs m8
south americans stealing jobs at norway FailFish smh
fucking peruvians, right?
Thing about it is, I was trying to recall a story that happened 5 years ago. There maybe scruinity in my story. If I had time, I would've gone into more depth into it. (Family is visting, had to say hi.)
I agree, I lack some knowledge on how debate works, but I do use what little I know to twist and work my way around things.
@Keyboard warrior Sven guy
You proved my point just by your long LONG statement that I skimmed over. Ride that dick to the end cowboy.
"No, the issue is that you are not actively improving and you aren't playing better, meaning you have no reason whatsoever to be frustrated with other people because it's obvious you've hit your ceiling and you're the problem. So if, and since you do know this, you have no reason to be frustrated with other people. If you, on the other hand, have almost 60% winrate in your bracket, are climbing and get people who literally go 0-10 in the first 10 minutes a few games in the row, you are going to be frustrated with your teamates, since you do not do that and you actually play well for your bracket. Do you have sufficient brain power to understand what I just told you? Also it's "knows", not "know's"."
Grammar Nazi: Check
Believes in human limits: Check
No back bone theory basis claim at hand: Check
I don't know who's worst. Me or you.
"If there's one thing I loathe it's people who are obviously shitty both at the game and in life spewing shit on other people, who actually have all indications of being superior on both fields."
I agree. Apply yourself more.
"Your deduction skills are terrible, try to gather some data instead of trying to 'think' shit into existence."
Well it's already written here so...
"I don't think you know what knowledge really means, though, and for someone who appears to try to abuse philosophy to some extent, your usage and definition of it is extremely lackluster."
My philosophy is don't be ashamed of who you are. Thus, my lack of shame. I would suck your dick, but your price is probably too low for me.
"At 3k, there's enough of a big player pool that you barely ever get people 200-300 MMR bellow you. If you're 5k or close to 5k you can get matched with people who are literally 3.9k or 4.2k and compared to the skill level of a 4.8k or 5.5k player, those are terrible. You're never going to play at 3.8k and get 2.8 teammates, there are too many players in that range for that to happen. Let's not forget account buyers who run rampant in that MMR bracket."
This a valve problem and needs to be fixed. Otherwise, misdirection.
"At 4k+ sure you can. If you pick something you can't play, your fault. If you play CM while you only play two heroes, your fault. If you can't play the game at all at 4k+, still your fault because you bought the account or paid somebody to boost you, etc."
I agree, but I play like 7-8 heroes. Try to diversify my play style.
"Well, compared to you, he's Jesus."
I agree. I'm a fuck. So what?
"No, I am defending somebody against accusations that you can't make based on the available data, because you're too busy "deducing" (which, in your head, means simply making shit up). Nope, you mastered jack shit, somebody who's good at debate actually wins some and uses consistent logic, what you're doing would never pass in a real debate, since you believe that deduction means making shit up. And it's laughable that somebody who had to boast about his IQ now claims to be a giant, AND acuses others of having a huge ego. That's extremely ironic."
I accused myself of having a huge ego. You're lost there. Making shit up is different than pulling actual knowledge at the forehand. Not to mention that you just literally missed a big part of my last paragraph and decide to ignore it.
"Also, mind that I don't consider this a debate, so I am neither formal or consistent enough on my own, because there's no debate with people who are as bad at it as you are. And for someone asking for a ton of proof on easily available data, you seem to make a ton of shit up/spread obvious lies/say a lot of unfalsifiable shit without any backing. Nice job."
I consider this a circle jerk session and I'm waiting for the money shot. Also, claiming someone is bad is good enough yes, but how do you stack up to a person who knows he's bad, calls people out for having piss poor behavior if they're "Superior". I did provide proof with my text base claim and Sano's current replies and attitude seems to back me up. He's a whinner. Accept that, and get off his dick.
Also unfalsifiable was a poor choice of a word, cause you can neither claim that I'm right, or I'm wrong. Meaning, there is some truth to what I just said, making your claim to my "lies' moot.
75% erected.
ecks dee
So when a 6k player gets "team hold me back" people it's something special and when lower mmr player get those players in a lot of games nobody gives a fuck
^
holy fuck what is this thread
Ecs
d
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
ee
ee
e
e
e
e
qbdawfhsf
This drama blew up after I left and I rate it 8/10.
well, that explains something
Here some Drake
Guise guise, can we all just get along :]]
:]]]]]]]]]
@Kendrick Midar
"So when a 6k player gets "team hold me back" people it's something special and when lower mmr player get those players in a lot of games nobody gives a fuck"
Exactly coz the "sven guy" actually was pretty clear i belive, that at high mmr the diffrence of mmr in the same team is pretty significant, u can be matched with ppl more than 500mmr lower than u coz the high mmr dudes r extremly low percentage of playerbase, which actually holds u back coz they r worse than u. On Lower mmr however that NEVER EVER happens just coz as "sven guy" said there r way to much ppl to have a huge mmr diffrence, so the games r pretty spot on balanced in the mmr part so there no imbalance there.
I know it sounds as double standarts but actually its not, its pretty diffrent actually.
this thread is nearly as borng as kumbo's mmr race one
what DaV said
also you have to realise that when you aren't 6k or more, you're actually pretty far from skill cap unlike in super high mmr games
jeezus, is it at least good drama? should i read it?
^i took the bullet for u m8 dont let my sacrifice go in vain....run u fool
^no.
6k is the new 5k. nothing special
can u stop arguing with this retarded weeb guy, actually no wonder why theyve beaten him up several times
Holy shit, this neko gamer soul guy. Can't believe he is so fucking retarded. Congrats man u just wasted 15 mins of everyone's life here thanks to ur dog-bullshit comments. Ffs man try to once respect a player superior in skill to you. Or do u want to be known as 'God of making shit up' in the dotabuff community? You attention seeking fool.
that was his plan all the time
le master trolle
;))_:)_(-°););););):))):°).°(/.
Guys I played against Sano and I can confirm he is 1k trash Elegiggle
im actually so fucking trash at this game its unbelievable