>make a compelling argument against an anon's blatantly wrong opinion
>call him a faggot at the end
>he now only focuses on the fact that I called him a faggot instead of my compelling argument
Why should it matter? It's not ad hominem, I've already made my point and only decided to call him a faggot after utterly destroying him with my superior rhetoric. Why do so many anon's decide that an argument is "invalidated" after being insulted? It's not like we're debating in a formal setting, we're having an argument on an online anime imageboard. I should be able to reserve my right to call someone a faggot without them deeming my argument "worthless" as a result.
Any anon's with me here?
You're giving him an easy out by calling him a faggot. Of course he's going to focus on the ad hom instead of admit that you rekt him.
>>396712
>make a compelling argument against an anon's blatantly wrong opinion
>he posts a fedora picture or calls you "autist"
Here's what you do. Don't call him a faggot in the first post. Wait for his response. Then to his response, just say "Faggot."
>>396712
Your first mistake was arguing in the first place.
>Make a compelling argument.
>Don't call them a faggot at the end.
>They call you a faggot.
>They feel like because they called you a faggot and you didn't call them a faggot, that means they won.
>>396712
faggot
Rule 11 you massive fucking newfags
>>396712
Here's the problem, OP. The Japanese ethos was warped forever by the atomic bomb attacks during WWII. Millions of Japanese men, women, and children were forced to come to terms with the idea of an overwhelmingly powerful entity outside of their control that could wipe them out of existence without warning using unspeakable weapons. They did this, for the most part, by exploring the idea in fiction. Godzilla is one example. Anime is another. If the United States of America were to deploy nuclear weaponry against Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and France, chances are the same thing would happen again: More Godzillas, and more anime. Do you think the world can really handle six animes? In the 1980's, United States President Ronald Reagan developed an idea known as "Mutually-Assured Destruction" (MAD). This philosophy stated that war with Russia would not happen, because there was no way to wage it without both countries being destroyed. I see this same situation today. We cannot nuke more countries for fear of mutually assured destruction when they create more anime. Thank you for your time.
>>396712
Because it's a lot harder to accept that you're wrong when you're being judged and insulted for it. Instead it makes people defensive, clinging to their wrong opinion and firing back however they can. You can blame them for that behavior if you want but you already know that it happens very consistently, and your own is the only one which you can alter.
>>396886
The only rules I've bothered to remember are rules 1, 2 and 34. 34 for obvious reasons.
>>396712
Whenever the faggot you're arguing with stops making counterarguments and starts complaining about your post containing fallacies, be sure to call him out for using the fallacist's fallacy.
An argument on 4chan must be won on both the logical/rational/legitimate debate front and the ironic/meme/ad hominem front, and you must be proficient in mixing the two posting styles if you want to be taken seriously here. When you do it right, the opposition won't be able to call you out no matter how many times you called him faggot. Not without embarrassing himself to the rest of the thread at least. If he can call you out and other people agree with him, then either your argument wasn't good enough, or you didn't play to the board culture in the right manner. Winning arguments on 4chan is an art.
>>396712
Is it just me or is it always anime avatarfags who post like shitters, provoke people, then are confused as to why people respond like shitters?
>>396946
There is nothing wrong with calling out illiterate retards who post like they're twelve years old for posting like idiots. Just don't use that as the sole argument when you're having an internet "debate" with them because you can't refute any of their actual points. Ideally, you should both utterly refute all of their points and call them out for posting like idiots at the same time.
