Are you sure that's my intention?
I endure plenty of opposition. If this were my goal, I'd surely have changed my strategy by now.
Guess again, Ape.
Disagreeable. The opposition you see is of course the opposition that haven't been discouraged, which isn't necessarily in any relation to the opposition that has indeed been discouraged. One doesn't put restrictions on the other.
I'm seeing it from my view. I post 2-3 posts a day on average. I don't bother to argue much with people who sidetrack the issues with technicalities and easily refutable arguments that don't amount to much more than stalling tactics. I argue as a person who knows what kinds of tactics can be used but hope to avoid them, and instead concentrate on the issue.
It's that kind of people you drive away by "sticking to your guns".
Compare with my approach: I have guns, I see guns on my opponent, so as expert gunfighters we can extrapolate what damage could be done, and make business accordingly. The guns don't even have to be drawn, let alone used. Hell, they don't even need to be mentioned. I mean.. people walking around with guns have to have other business to do than just showcasing their firepower If there's no business, no mutual benefit to be had, then it reduces to just barbaric firefight.
Edit: sleep for me. Good night. You wouldn't believe but I was actually delighted to hear you don't wish your opposition away. Perhaps we'll have a good discussion some time.
Listen Blue, if my straying from the topic* hinders you from understanding, then perhaps it's you who has trouble keeping focus.
If you can't find a way to position my presumed utterances into your ideas, then its your weakness -- not mine.
It may be evident of a weakness, but it's not proof. And I have sufficiently proven in the past that I can stay on task
*Something which almost never actually happens -- I use anecdotes or analogies to make points about the situation at hand... it's not really straying, but since BlueWing doesn't have the patience to let anyone else finish a thought before he starts to correct them, he's cornered himself into the delusion that I have this problem.
And by the way, I've got more than a little evidence to prove that he consistently interrupts a speaker mid-thought to correct them. I'd be willing to bet he doesn't read a full sentence in a post before stopping to correct them, even if only in his own mind.
This is a communicative problem because often, a speaker may have some fact that, when calculated into the rest of the equation, the result is changed entirely.
Once more, not a clue!
The problem is with you talking jibberish, hands down.
"Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain
“No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson