Is Undecided Nico?

Discussion in 'About the Members' started by Rappaccini, Mar 13, 2004.


Is Undecided Nico?

Poll closed Apr 12, 2004.
  1. Undecided is Nico.

    18 vote(s)
  2. Undecided is not Nico.

    2 vote(s)
  3. Other

    4 vote(s)
  1. whitewolf asleep under the juniper bush Registered Senior Member

    A poster's identity does not matter. What matters is the idea of each post.

    If you can't carry an argument, it does not mean you have to insult people, dig into their lives, etc. Be adults!

    Besides, many people re-register a few times, nico wouldn't be the first one. In fact, anyone who got banned can keep coming back again and again. Then, what's the point of banning? Might as well find a different way to deal with the problem, like ignore the poster, or be a little more competent in arguments....
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Undecided Banned Banned

    How so? The thread unto itself is "argument directed against the man". Is it not? The premise of the entire thing is fallacious, and it is vengeful at best. But I know the tinge of these parts, and I know the ppl who posted on this thread are not the most savory of characters here on sci. Just intent on furthering my character assination. This thread should be closed because it has literally nothing to do with governing sci forums firstly, and I have already listed my other argumentations as to why this is the epitome of idiocy and should be discarded at best.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Rappaccini Redoubtable Registered Senior Member

    No, Undecided, this is not Ad Hominem.

    An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally "argument against the man"), is a fallacy that involves replying to an argument or assertion by attempting to discredit the person offering the argument or assertion.

    Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia

    Look it up on your own, if you must, my friend.

    My question concerns you.
    You are my topic.

    I have not directed anything "against the man," but merely toward the topic with which I started this discussion and poll.

    Stokes? What about him? Certainly I do not approve of the motion you started, but this thread cannot rightly be called "vengeance".

    It is merely a question.

    Will you answer it, or must your peers do that for you?
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Undecided Banned Banned

    My suggestion to you is be rational and make some conclusions:

    premĀ·ise ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prms)
    n. also premĀ·iss (prms)
    A proposition upon which an argument is based or from which a conclusion is drawn.

    "argument directed against the man".

    The premise of this thread is ad hom.
  8. Persol I am the great and mighty Zo. Registered Senior Member

    Sounding more and more like nico through this argument.
  9. Shmoo The CzarnaChapka Registered Senior Member

    Your reasoning for this thread being closed is the same as your reasoning for wanted Stokes banned. Ad hom attacks. Seeing how you've already lost the fight to have Stokes banned, your attempt at closing this thread will ultimately have the same result. Your best bet is to stop fueling the fire, and to sit back (as you said you would earlier) and watch the show.
  10. Rappaccini Redoubtable Registered Senior Member

    Undecided, I made no argument against you;
    My premise was a question, not a perjorative assertion.

    I asked a question, a very simple question.

    I am "the man" that ad hominem refers to.
    Your response to me was an assault, an argument that was "against" me.

    You mocked me and stigmatized this thread as "vengeance" instead of simply and easily silencing me with an answer.

    You are a hypocrite.

    Happy Trails.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  11. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    As if there is doubt?

    Not that it particularly matters, but he is nico. He as much as admitted it in some thread a ways back. It's a dead issue. I would note however that nico also at some point a while before tha claimed directly that he is not nico as well. Which really just cements the "is nico" thing.

    Is nico, check.
  12. Undecided Banned Banned

    Where have I mocked you? All I said is that this thread is laughable. What assault? Where do these imaginary assaults occur? If your mind is made up anyways, what is the point of continuing this? Simple to attack my character, the premise is overt. Do continue.
  13. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    What's funny is that you know the two votes "no" are nico and undecided.

  14. 15ofthe19 35 year old virgin Registered Senior Member

    Anybody got any good recipe's for crow? Somebody is going to have a plateful to eat before this thread is locked.
  15. 15ofthe19 35 year old virgin Registered Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    This would be a good place to start looking.
  16. Rappaccini Redoubtable Registered Senior Member

    Please do not pollute this thread with images. I do not want it closed prematurely.
    The poll should be open for all to use.

    Undecided, none of your responses answered my question and a few hardly even addressed the topic.
    Those that did basically conveyed your perpetual, universally applicable opinion: this is stupid.

    ... an insult to the forum's collective intellectuality.

    My question is an insult to the collective intellectuality of this forum? Nice.

    Maybe, or maybe you have absolutely nothing better to do, which is a sad comment.

    Bellow the belt, mayhap?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I know the ppl who posted on this thread are not the most savory of characters here on sci.

    Discrediting me and everyone else posting. Very nice.

    I am enjoying this is because it totally and completely supports my assertions that sci ad homers have taken over.

    You callin' me an "ad homer"?

    I think sooooooo.

    You are, in this case, guilty of ad hominem, that very same fallacy you constantly complain of.
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2004
  17. Undecided Banned Banned

    I am saddened by this show of ridiculousness, attacking me and attacking the intelligence of the community is quite an accomplishment. Of course we here have the typical posters who make it their business to decide who I am for me. Which is ok, b/c I think most ppl simply don't care who I am. As whitewolf has said it is the posts that matter not the man. Some ppl are simply incapable of grasping that, and I don't blame them for doing it. Frankly I think it is social commentary not only of this community but of society at large. You simply cannot go through life without the occasional assassin waiting to kill your character. I can live with it though; I have for quite a while now. I recognize my shortcomings, they are plenty. But I don't think ppl are introspective enough to question themselves, ppl are to scared to question themselves. The ppl who regularly attack me for whichever reason do the same thing, and in excess. I obviously am a very important poster on this website, enough to rattle some heads into doing these threads. It is a twisted irony that I take pleasure in knowing that the ppl who want dead (character wise) are not succeding. I wonder why some ppl take this type of "tabloid" thread into consideration, and importance? It is symptomatic of a great thing, a thing where the masses can forget their inadequacies, and make some up for their enemies. This is ominous to me because it is like a leering shadow over my head that wants to consume me. Almost everyone who has posted here has an agenda to see me sequel and squirm under the pressure for their own enjoyment, quite possibly to forget their misgivings of their lives. Me like an idiot fell for it, and I recognize that as a weakness. So I leave the 4 or 5 posters who take pleasure in this to debate this like girls debate over the next episode of passions.
  18. Rappaccini Redoubtable Registered Senior Member

    Can't swallow what you dished out for yourself?

    Do you think that diatribe, rife with new insults, is going to make up for your hypocrisy?

    It makes you seem all the more absurd a character, a character that is less the victim of unjust "assassination," as you term it, and more the victim of his own mindless equivocation and woe's-to-me attitude.

    To cease with this digression, are you Nico?
    Yes or no will do, friend.
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2004
  19. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    And the question is important to what?

    As far as I can tell, the whole issue with Nico/Undecided is the fact that people wish to continue having the same, useless problems with Undecided that they had with Nico.

    The issue of identity and credibility is one I've wondered about before; after all, I've been accosted for my treatment of a "new user", yet among those who would call me out on such a position is at least one who has, in the past, pushed the Nico/Undecided stake. I'm not entirely sure what difference it makes whether or not somebody is someone else. I've had plenty of folks over time sign up under new handles and seek to resume an old argument. Undecided, in this sense, would not be the first one.

    And it's quite a bit easier if I don't try to track who's who this week. Turns out the "new user" I was apparently so mean to wasn't a new user, but just a secondary identity. I'm not going to try to account for that. Nor am I going to try to account for a number of people with whom I've had several nasty arguments who happen to match up with another poster I actually respect.

    In the meantime, could somebody answer for me a simple question: Why is this important at all?

    Think about it: How important is Nico or Undecided to you people that this discussion persists?

    Rather quite, it would seem.

    To comment on one specific part of this topic and its posts, however:
    Said the rapist to the little girl. Said the soldier to the dead man. (I can go on.)

    I make these harsh counterpoints because, while it certainly would be easier if Undecided would simply accommodate those obsessed with him, it would also be easier if the question actually mattered in any way.

    I'm voting "Other" because there's not a "Who freaking cares?" option.

    (And I thought the Ban Wars were ridiculous ....)
  20. Rappaccini Redoubtable Registered Senior Member

    "Other" is the "who freaking cares" option.
    I specified this in my first post, though not explicitly.

    ... I'll admit, in all honesty, that this thread was a set-up for Undecided.

    But the question, stripped of my designs, does have merit, Tiassa, if only for the fact that it was asked in truest curiosity.

    I do care, I suppose, and, if Undecided will not resolve the matter, the voters will.
  21. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Very well.
    But why?!

    This is what makes no sense to me.

    Honestly, I don't see what the answer to the question changes.
  22. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    I disagree with the irony.


    Nizkor entries on fallacies including ad hominem, ad hominem tu quoque, "ad hominem abusive" (personal attack), and "poisoning the well."

    - hominem entry on ad hominem, see usage note; I would do the copy and paste here but I'm using a Windows box that frightens me insofar as it feels as if it's twenty years old, running at modern speed. (Sorry, even my negative opinion of Windows doesn't extend to expect this particular reality.)

    At any rate, the basis of ad hominem seems to have been relatively neutral, and it is in recent times, in an effort to trump up shallow political and legal argumentation, that the transformation to the term we're all so vaguely familiar with at Sciforums.

    What is referred to as "personal attack" and "poisoning the well" at Nizkor are, I think, the most relevant "ad hom" aspects that Undecided is trying to stop. And while there may be an argument to be had for irony, I don't think the present is actually it.
  23. Rappaccini Redoubtable Registered Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


Share This Page