tsherkin wrote:CoP wrote:It's irrelevant that you think that it's a defensible position. A lot of people think that a lot of ridiculous positions are defensible. It has no bearing on my point, which is that if someone disagrees with an opinion strongly enough, that's pretty much the same as them thinking that opinion is silly or ridiculous.
Anyway, this is just a silly (yes, silly) semantics argument at this point and not worth pursuing further.
No, I mean. The idea of supporting Wemby over Tatum isn't silly. That position is objectively false. There are a variety of ways to prove that. It isn't wrong to support a pro-Tatum angle, but to be so dismissive of the Wemby position as to call it silly is disingenuous and inaccurate.
So you don't even know what I was calling ridiculous/silly. Got it.