Logic and Reasonable Argument

[mdiehl]

# of aircraft points lost: Japan- 2575 / Allied- 2689
# of Army points lost: Japan- 564 / Allied- 8079
# of capital ships lost by Japan- 1 BB, 1 CA, 4 Cl, 12 DD
# of captial ships lost by Allies- 2 BB, 1 BC, 4 CA, 8 CL

I'd say that reflects well on the Allies for June 1942. The historical Japanese had a stronger record by that date.

I quit the game because you had absolutely no desire to play with anything resembling even the slightest bit of historical context. Instead, you found and used every little gamey exploit.

Well, your claim is that you had him over the ropes but you quit the game because he used the mechanics of the game in ways that the game permitted and that you either did not anticipate or felt violated your sense of what was plausible in WW2 in the PTO.

So the difference there was that you basically quit the game because you felt the game was allowing him to accomplish things that a good model would not allow an allied player to do. He on the other hand played the game in part demonstrating that the game was allowing him to do things that a good model would not allow an allied player to do.

So you quit playing and he stayed in the game for basically the same reasons.

So Tristanjohn abandoned the SRA eh? Good for him. It was essentially ABDA's war plan to fall back to Timor or Soerbaja into a prepared position and rope-a-dope the Japanese until help could arrive. In the real war ABDA did not do so. I think TJ's doing same falls in the category of plausible alt history. To prevent it, all Japan had to do was put air and naval assets in the way to encircle and destroy army and fleet assets in the SRA... which is basically what the real Japanese did.

[WLockard]

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

ORIGINAL: WLockard

Nice catch Nikademus. TristenJohn, trying to pass off this as your own?

I believe he said it wasn't his.

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

Use it as you please. There's nothing original there, except for my own phrasing. I'm merely the messenger. The message itself has been common wisdom since forever

Show me in the original post where he indicates that this is copywrited material. I never saw that so I when assumed that it was his own writting, not plagerized. [:-]

[WLockard]

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: WLockard

ORIGINAL: Nikademus



You'd better ask one of the principle authors first since it's copywrited.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacie ... html#index

Nice catch Nikademus. [:)][&o] TristenJohn, trying to pass off this as your own? [:-][X(]

That site was one of my sources. I believe I hit seven or eight sites in all. Why would you have a special problem with that? It's called r-e-s-e-a-r-c-h, and I wouldn't know how else to go about it. You don't suppose anyone carries all that up inside their heads all day, do you? Ask yourself this. Where do you suppose the Nizkor Project got its information? Do you suppose they invented this stuff?

As I clearly posted previously above in response to someone, there is nothing original about this work. I'm only the messenger. The information itself can be widely found in various forms, and it's all as old as the hills. I've given you my form of it here, and if you were smart you'd use it for the intended purpose.

But as always, follow your own heart. [:)]

And what I see is that you copied their work word for word and did not provide any credit to them. Is this the normal way to do research? Just copy what others write with no reference? Normally when copywrited works are quoted and/or copied, I would expect some kind of aknowledgement.

[mdiehl]

1. The link does not work, so the assertion that something has been plagiarized remains undemonstrated.
2. Whether or not it is copied the text is basically appropriate, so this diversion into whether or not TJ can be cast as a monster is merely a Red Herring and nothing more.
3. If said text is Copyrighted, were I TJ, I'd delete it and provide instead a link. One that works. But then, not everything that claims to be copyrighted is in fact copyrighted.

[WLockard]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

1. The link does not work, so the assertion that something has been plagiarized remains undemonstrated.
2. Whether or not it is copied the text is basically appropriate, so this diversion into whether or not TJ can be cast as a monster is merely a Red Herring and nothing more.
3. If said text is Copyrighted, were I TJ, I'd delete it and provide instead a link. One that works. But then, not everything that claims to be copyrighted is in fact copyrighted.

The link works fine for me. The very top statement is that it is copywrited material.
I am not a college grad, just high school, but I do understand what plagerism is.

[Yamato hugger]

[Bradley7735]

Well, if you're going to harass Tristanjohn about posting copyrighted material, or material that isn't his own without him stating who the author is, then you need to harass just about everyone on this forum.

There is an absolute crap load of information on these posts that come from someone else's writing. From the mod guys who cut and paste data to the guys who post pictures and text about past events. at least half the guys on here have posted something written by someone else without actually giving credit to the author. (a lot of them do, though.)

I'm a bit ignorant on what you can and can't do with copyrighted material. I highly doubt that Tristanjohn has broken any laws, though.

[tsimmonds]

Where is the "two guys p1ssing on each others' boots" smilie when you need it?[;)]

Here is an interesting discussion of what "copyright" means and what it does not.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: WLockard

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: WLockard




Nice catch Nikademus. [:)][&o] TristenJohn, trying to pass off this as your own? [:-][X(]

That site was one of my sources. I believe I hit seven or eight sites in all. Why would you have a special problem with that? It's called r-e-s-e-a-r-c-h, and I wouldn't know how else to go about it. You don't suppose anyone carries all that up inside their heads all day, do you? Ask yourself this. Where do you suppose the Nizkor Project got its information? Do you suppose they invented this stuff?

As I clearly posted previously above in response to someone, there is nothing original about this work. I'm only the messenger. The information itself can be widely found in various forms, and it's all as old as the hills. I've given you my form of it here, and if you were smart you'd use it for the intended purpose.

But as always, follow your own heart. [:)]

And what I see is that you copied their work word for word and did not provide any credit to them. Is this the normal way to do research? Just copy what others write with no reference? Normally when copywrited works are quoted and/or copied, I would expect some kind of aknowledgement.

The only thing I remember copying verbatim from the Nizkor site was its reference to other names for Appeal to Authority: "Fallacious Appeal to Authority, Misuse of Authority, Irrelevant Authority, Questionable Authority, Inappropriate Authority, Ad Verecundiam," and if you think that deserves a footnote you've got another think coming.

In the main I substantially rewrote everything I copied from various sites, with at least three-fourths of the gross copy in my article being wholly original expression. If there's still an expression or two left over from someone else's work, I can live with that. If you cannot live with that, I don't what to say. Maybe you should see a doctor about that.

I dare say it would be impossible to write any such article without the resort to "plagiarism" in one form or another, to one degree or another, of quite a bit of old thought, for you see this thought has been around for centuries and hasn't changed a whit, there are only so many ways of giving examples for all the various cases presented, and so on.

In fact, the Nizkor site does carry a copyright declaration at the bottom of its pages, but that is mainly worthless. Everything written is automatically copyrighted (in this country) immediately it is written, for whatever that's worth. In the case of what Nizkor has published, I find their copyright hardly sincere within the kind of framework you suggest, as all of the material there (from what I've read--I haven't read that much of it) is "public domain" of nature and undoubtedly "lifted" from one place or another by the person or people who constructed that site before they rewrote that. It isn't as if the Nizkor Project just finished writing something unique, say, "the great American novel."

In any event, as I clearly posted above in reply to another person, there is nothing in the article that is original of nature, just a rehash of same-same thinking on a subject that winds back to the Greeks. Me, I'm just the messenger. In a manner of speaking, I'm only doing your work for you. Not that you would or could appreciate that, but as long as we're pointing out "niceties" today. . . .




[center]© Tristanjohn News Syndicate 2005[/center]

[WLockard]

From the front page of the web site:

Dr. Michael C. Labossiere, the author of a Macintosh tutorial named Fallacy Tutorial Pro 3.0, has kindly agreed to allow the text of his work to appear on the Nizkor site, as a Nizkor Feature. It remains © Copyright 1995 Michael C. Labossiere, with distribution restrictions -- please see our copyright notice. If you have questions or comments about this work, please direct them both to the Nizkor webmasters (webmaster@nizkor.org) and to Dr. Labossiere (ontologist@aol.com).

Pretty plain to me.

[Tristanjohn]

By the way, you wouldn't be yet another of the countless "phantom accounts" this board has become infamous for over the years, would you? [8|]

[TulliusDetritus]

What Tristan said/pasted has been said since the greeks... so 2,300 years ago (Aristotle).

In fact, that paragraph sounds pretty familiar to me. I guess Aristotle wrote it, and someone else used it (with a little cosmetic change). That guy (from that web site) cannot plagiarize those ideas and say "this is copyrighted now". Aristotle -- and every author before XX century -- cannot be copyrighted [;)]

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: Redd


By the way, Tj, how are the "tempests of storms" over the bay today. It's pretty dark over here in my neck of the woods, but the air is calm and quiet.

Ahh Haa, finally something that I understand from this thread and can speak of with some authority. Tempest Storm, was a hot fine stripper from the dark fog of my muddled confused youth. It goes to prove the Bob Newhart routine. Take an infinite number of monkeys and put them at an infinite number of typewriters and you will eventually come up with a great works (To be or not to be).

[rtrapasso]

It goes to prove the Bob Newhart routine. Take an infinite number of monkeys and put them at an infinite number of typewriters and you will eventually come up with a great works (To be or not to be).

Now, that pre-dates Newhart. He stole copyrighted material and used it for his own nefarious purposes...[:-]

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

I guess that shows that what you catch depends a great deal on what you're fishin' for....

By the way, has that kitten of yours ever hit anything?

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

By the way, has that kitten of yours ever hit anything?

He ALMOST got this guy:

[tsimmonds]

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

I guess that shows that what you catch depends a great deal on what you're fishin' for....

By the way, has that kitten of yours ever hit anything?

Only the pause button....

[rtrapasso]

Only the pause button....

Shouldn't that be the paws button?

[tsimmonds]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

Only the pause button....

Shouldn't that be the paws button?

[;)]

[Admiral DadMan]

Then of course there's this:

[center][font="Times New Roman"]The Atheism Web

Logic & Fallacies[/font][/center]