• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Milo - Dangerous

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Atreus21 said:
So in short you interpreted what I said in the way most likely to support your presumptions.

Shrug. I suppose there are still high schoolers who debate like this.
Click to expand...
Not my presumptions: reality. Here you were, the one who started it, not making it evident. That's obfuscation, buddy, and I'm gonna call it out. You don't like it, do better next time.
 
SlowSpyder said:
Cool comments about his book bruh.

Now on to what I actually said... he makes some great points in his debates I've watched, really hammers feminists and left of common sense liberals. The over reactive left doesn't know how to handle him, he doesn't fit into their compartmentalized partisan stereotypes. He's well spoken and a good debater. The fact that the left practically riots when he is going to visit their safe space campus is very telling. Anything that threatens their totalitarian bubble is attacked viciously.
Click to expand...

This is a perfect example of being blinded by bluster, assholery and cults of personality over logic and reason.

The fact that he can and will provide no transcripts of these arguments that destroy his opposition is very telling indeed and indicative of people who are snowed by personality in the spoken word, yet realize an argument loses its luster when transcribed and devoid of the personality behind it.

Welcome to the YouTube generation who are snowed by logical fallacies, snake oil salesmen and flat earthers. People like Cernovich, Milo, Jones and Molineux are perfect examples of cults of personality whose arguments are utterly devoid of logic and filled with the most basic of logical fallacies. Yet their personality alone convinces people they are winning the argument. Molineux has even gone as far as to sue anyone who transcribes his arguments or even posts videos using his content to tear apart his logical fallacies. Yeah, a so called anti-government anarcho-capitalist uses big daddy government when it suits him.

This is why I never watch a YouTube video and always demand a transcript. If the argument loses in the written format it loses over all.
 
Amused said:
This is a perfect example of being blinded by bluster, assholery and cults of personality over logic and reason.

The fact that he can and will provide no transcripts of these arguments that destroy his opposition is very telling indeed and indicative of people who are snowed by personality in the spoken word, yet realize an argument loses its luster when transcribed and devoid of the personality behind it.

Welcome to the YouTube generation who are snowed by logical fallacies, snake oil salesmen and flat earthers. People like Cernovich, Milo, Jones and Molineux are perfect examples of cults of personality whose arguments are utterly devoid of logic and filled with the most basic of logical fallacies. Yet their personality alone convinces people they are winning the argument. Molineux has even gone as far as to sue anyone who transcribes his arguments or even posts videos using his content to tear apart his logical fallacies. Yeah, a so called anti-government anarcho-capitalist uses big daddy government when it suits him.

This is why I never watch a YouTube video and always demand a transcript. If the argument loses in the written format it loses over all.
Click to expand...


Nope. My comment was that I've seen some of his debates on Youtube, and that he's made good arguments in those videos I've seen. I think Milo is a great debater and makes great points in those debates I've watched. I'm not going to watch a 15 minute to hour long video typing out the debate. If you wish to close your mind to a very common avenue of content consumption, that's your call. I can post videos of Milo's where I think he really makes strong arguments, but AT P&N thinks I should transcribe them for some reason, and I am not doing that. I watch leftist content on Youtube, like The Young Turks and John Oliver quite regularly. I don't agree with them always, but I cannot say they never have a point. Milo is much the same, I've seen many videos on him and feel he often makes good points in his arguments.
 
SlowSpyder said:
Nope. My comment was that I've seen some of his debates on Youtube. I think Milo is a great debater and makes great points in those debates I've watched. I'm not going to watch a 15 minute to hour long video typing out the debate. If you wish to close your mind to a very common avenue of content consumption, that's your call. I can post videos of Milo's where I think he really makes strong arguments, but AT P&N thinks I should transcribe them for some reason, and I am not doing that. I watch leftist content on Youtube, like The Young Turks and John Oliver quite regularly. I don't agree with them always, but I cannot say they never have a point. Milo is much the same, I've seen many videos on him and feel he often makes good points in his arguments.
Click to expand...

You just proved my point, And the sad part is, you're obviously too fucking stupid to realize you're being snowed by personality, bluster and logical fallacies rather than logic and reason. This is the hallmark of the YouTube personality.

There's a reason these guys have no transcripts.
 
Amused said:
You just proved my point, And the sad part is, you're obviously too fucking stupid to realize you're being snowed by personality, bluster and logical fallacies rather than logic and reason. This is the hallmark of the YouTube personality.

There's a reason these guys have no transcripts.
Click to expand...

prove
pro͞ov/
verb
  1. 1.
    demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.

You and team left are having a tough time today.
 
UglyCasanova said:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...los-book-deal-simon-schuster-dangerous-outcry


Good lord at the people with their panties in a wad over this. Milo is Milo, someone who found his niche and is making bank off of it. I think it was ridiculous that Twitter suspended his account (especially given plenty of the other crap that's allowed to go on on there) and speaks volumes about the company. I also think Brietbart is biased as shit and not worth reading. But good lord.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...iannopoulos_just_got_a_250_000_book_deal.html


Number 1 on Amazon. Not a fan of Milo but this still puts a smile on my face. And congrats to Simon & Schuster for still publishing despite the backlash.
Click to expand...
UHHMM Milo who?
 
fskimospy said:
It is so incredibly painful to watch conservatives try and be funny. They never seem to understand that political jokes have to be funny first and political second.
Click to expand...

Case in point: Actual political humor from someone who knows all about self-deprecation. 😉

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top