High Speed vs. Tight Turns

[Tank-Ace]

It's my squad's avatar/logo thingy *shrug*

Okay, whatver.

Really? I don't remember ever making such a post. Maybe in an offhand manner while laughing at you for being worse at writing the English language than 90% of this board's European posters...I think I said something like "If you were my kid I'd be ashamed of you" or something of the sort. Is that it? (Are your parents ashamed of you?) 

I really don't know anything about European schools vs American schools, so I call BS. If I've done it 'repeatedly' as you claim, you should be able to provide at least one link or quote to prove me wrong   I'll be waiting...

IIRC, first one wasn't even directed at me.

And I'll give you the link if I ever bother to go looking for a handfull of specific posts amongst your many trolls. Convincing you that you were an arse in the past isn't really worth my time. If I find some other reason to go digging them up, then you'll get them.

I don't think you did your homework well enough then, I've posted plenty of negative things about the UK. If I thought it was perfect I'd probably still be there.

Like I said, I quit after page 10. Even by then, I had seen enough to know that anything constructive would be one of the few gems buried in all the drivel.

However, if I were to humour you in this line of reasoning, I've also never posted any negative comments about Ethiopia...does that mean that I think Ethiopia is better than America?

If you had been to Ethiopia, and it was a more common topic of conversation, it very well might.

It would be an ad hominem attack if I called you a donkey raping **** eater

It is not an ad hominem attack for me to refer to you as a badly educated child

I like to think that I avoid ad hominem posts (or strawman arguments) in my posts in the O'Club and elsewhere - generally they aren't required because people do such a good job of making themselves look stupid that I just have to point it out, rather than go on a name calling spree.

Hardly. If its a personal attack (or even just an argument against me personally, rather than my argument), then its ad hominem.

But if you have some links to posts I've made where I am randomly name calling with nothing to back it up, then by all means link them.

I don't have to, you did it yourself in this very post.

Finally I'd just like to note that my comment...

"I don't play Aces High but I just thought I'd come and interject my pointless and irrelevant opinion into your discussion and then argue about it"

...obviously struck a nerve with you, seeing as this thread is now completely off topic because of you getting upset about it and wanting to 'get back' at me

Not really. The earlier argument kind of petered out, once I had cleared things up with Debrody, and explained to nrshida why sustained vs zoom climb was irrelevant to my argument.

If I'm such an obvious troll and an 'arse' (not to mention bitter and depressed and whatever else it was), then it would be much more sensible just to ignore me when I make fun of you   You haven't learned that lesson yet after all this time...although I noticed that you DID make a big effort with your spelling and grammar starting a month or two back (or at least just started using spellcheck), despite saying that you don't care about such things.

You are an obvious troll, and you are most definitely an arse. You quite clearly derive enjoyment from stirring things up (this very argument is evidence of that fact).

I'm actually not all that carefull with spelling or grammar. Verticle is actually not recognized by the spell check, and so if I had bothered to be carefull, the mistake would have been caught. I don't really know if my grammar improved between 2 months and now, or you simply were not looking as hard for mistakes, although personally I suspect the latter.


In any case, the only reason I even bothered to respond to you is that your initial post was based on a logical fallacy that personally I find very annoying. And comically, I only find it annoying because other trolls have employed it to derail perfectly good discussions before.

If I can nip that asinine crap in the bud... well worth the effort expended.

[coombz]

IIRC, first one wasn't even directed at me.

And I'll give you the link if I ever bother to go looking for a handfull of specific posts

I think you must be thinking of a different poster, I've never 'commented repeatedly on how European schools are better than American schools'.  

With you it's a lot easier to believe you're just plain wrong rather than maliciously lying, so I'll let it pass

Hardly. If its a personal attack (or even just an argument against me personally, rather than my argument), then its ad hominem.

So am I to believe that your claim that I am unhappy and bitter (made up in your own head because I make fun of you and others on the internet) is not an ad hominem attack that invalidates your argument, BUT my claim that you are a badly educated child (colloquially known as 'cold hard facts', backed up by your age and inability to write English to the standard of many who have learned it as a 2nd language) is?

It's a circular argument to be sure...I take the piss out of you, you say you don't care and that I am just a grammar nazi or bitter or whatever, I take the piss out of you some more...we could be here all week ;>  

Not really. The earlier argument kind of petered out, once I had cleared things up with Debrody, and explained to nrshida why sustained vs zoom climb was irrelevant to my argument.

Ah yes, the earlier argument where you stated the the KI-84 is known for it's zoom climb and ability to hang on it's prop (?? lol), and then continued to argue with Mister KI-84 himself, nrshida, claiming that he was misunderstanding you and that you were right all along

You are an obvious troll, and you are most definitely an arse.

So is this an ad hominem attack or not? Are you a hypocrite, or is my little brain just incapable of following the heights of logic that your stellar intellect is capable of reaching in this artful dissection of my character (which has been elegantly summed up, repeatedly, as as that of 'a troll and an arse' )?

You quite clearly derive enjoyment from stirring things up (this very argument is evidence of that fact)...

...In any case, the only reason I even bothered to respond to you is that your initial post was based on a logical fallacy that personally I find very annoying. And comically, I only find it annoying because other trolls have employed it to derail perfectly good discussions before.

If I can nip that asinine crap in the bud... well worth the effort expended.

If you think that the way to nip trolls in the bud is to write a boat load of paragraphs arguing with them and telling them that you find them very annoying then...

Oh, well, never mind. Maybe you'll figure it out for yourself one day...

I'm off to chill on the beach with my gorgeous girl and wonderful son (but I'll make sure to be bitter and unhappy while I'm there). We can resume this tomorrow if you still haven't learned better

[Tank-Ace]

So am I to believe that your claim that I am unhappy and bitter (made up in your own head because I make fun of you and others on the internet) is not an ad hominem attack that invalidates your argument, BUT my claim that you are a badly educated child (colloquially known as 'cold hard facts', backed up by your age and inability to write English to the standard of many who have learned it as a 2nd language) is?

I've said no such thing. Did I post an ad hominem attack? Yeah, I was slightly pissed.

And what is your reasoning for saying I'm inept in the use of the English language?

For all your talk of how poor I am, your attack is based on a few grammatical errors (and many only in formal writing), and a few words I consistently misspell.

Hell, the very fact that I haven't botched my subject-verb agreement, save through typos, and haven't messed up the irregular verbs since kindergarden puts me ahead of many, perhaps most, non-native English speakers.

Whats more, this is one of the least formal methods of communication possible. The only ones more informal than this I can think of off the top of my head are texting and IM'ing.

Ah yes, the earlier argument where you stated the the KI-84 is known for it's zoom climb and ability to hang on it's prop (?? lol), and then continued to argue with Mister KI-84 himself, nrshida, claiming that he was misunderstanding you and that you were right all along

Zoom climb was technically incorrect. But, yes, by and large, the Ki-84 is known for being good at hanging on the prop. Not class of the field, but still good.

And yes, the 'master of the Ki-84' did misunderstand that exactly why the Ki-84 is good in the vertical is entirely irrelevant to the point I was making.
 

So is this an ad hominem attack or not? Are you a hypocrite, or is my little brain just incapable of following the heights of logic that your stellar intellect is capable of reaching in this artful dissection of my character (which has been elegantly summed up, repeatedly, as as that of 'a troll and an arse' )?

I never said I hadn't or wouldn't make ad hominem attacks, especially when there is actually some base of truth in them; something you seem to have difficulty identifying.

That you somehow came to the conclusion that I had suggests the latter of the two possibilities.

If you think that the way to nip trolls in the bud is to write a boat load of paragraphs arguing with them and telling them that you find them very annoying then...

Oh, well, never mind. Maybe you'll figure it out for yourself one day...

I'm off to chill on the beach with my gorgeous girl and wonderful son (but I'll make sure to be bitter and unhappy while I'm there). We can resume this tomorrow if you still haven't learned better

I took care of the "Tank-Ace doesn't play right now! He can't possibly have any idea what hes talking about, despite the 6 years of play prior to canceling his account" crap, now didn't I? And that was the primary purpose in replying to you.

[coombz]

And what is your reasoning for saying I'm inept in the use of the English language?

For all your talk of how poor I am, your attack is based on a few grammatical errors (and many only in formal writing), and a few words I consistently misspell.

Hell, the very fact that I haven't botched my subject-verb agreement, save through typos, and haven't messed up the irregular verbs since kindergarden puts me ahead of many, perhaps most, non-native English speakers.

lol

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

I do agree with you about this being an informal method of communication though, it's for that reason that I let my standards slip a lot with regards to capitalization and full stops when posting here (and the additional reason that it's often a pain in the backside to edit posts on a phone/tablet).

Don't agree that you've taken care of the 'Tank Ace doesn't play the game but still sticks his oar in as if his opinion is any way relevant or sought after' thing, but I guess time will tell on that one  

[nrshida]

Zoom climb was technically incorrect. But, yes, by and large, the Ki-84 is known for being good at hanging on the prop. Not class of the field, but still good.

And yes, the 'master of the Ki-84' did misunderstand that exactly why the Ki-84 is good in the vertical is entirely irrelevant to the point I was making.

I didn't misunderstand, I simply didn't understand your point, which turned out to be contrived and uninformative anyway.

Frankly I think you didn't understand the difference between zoom climb and sustained climb at the start of this discussion, now I think you do, but you might consider being be a little less noodlesure in future. Youth 

Even 'masters of the Ki-84' may view themselves to be merely 'students of the Ki-84' and are always receptive to learning new things and listening to other people.

[nrshida]

'Noodlesure'? What a nonsense correction. 

[RTHolmes]

3 pages of

[FTJR]

3 pages of (Image removed from quote.)

yup, the way I like to start my day

popcorn?

[coombz]

and you loved every minute of it  

[Tank-Ace]

I didn't misunderstand, I simply didn't understand your point, which turned out to be contrived and uninformative anyway.

How is my point that you don't want to slow 150mph below your opponent's speed for a small advantage in turn rate in any way contrived?

Thats the point of the post which touched all this off. I explained what I meant to debrody, and then you and I began hashing things out about the sustained vs zoom thing.

Frankly I think you didn't understand the difference between zoom climb and sustained climb at the start of this discussion, now I think you do, but you might consider being be a little less noodlesure in future. Youth 

I knew the difference, I just didn't word my comment as well as I might have; I'm just as human, and just as suceptible to flaw as you or anyone else. But whatever, you probably won't believe me anyway, and whether or not I had a grasp of zoom vs sustained before this began is rather agressively irrelevent by this point.

Even 'masters of the Ki-84' may view themselves to be merely 'students of the Ki-84' and are always receptive to learning new things and listening to other people.

Wasn't intended as a jab at you sir.

[coombz]

How is my point that you don't want to slow 150mph below your opponent's speed for a small advantage in turn rate in any way contrived?

It was contrived because you were making an obvious point that was only tangentially relevant to the discussion.

This isn't the Help & Training forum, there is no need to come along and post something that everyone already knows just because you like to try and sound knowledgeable.

To then begin arguing about it like everyone was somehow misunderstanding your very valuable contribution...well, you can see what prompted my original post

[Tank-Ace]

It was contrived because you were making an obvious point that was only tangentially relevant to the discussion.

This isn't the Help & Training forum, there is no need to come along and post something that everyone already knows just because you like to try and sound knowledgeable.

Considering that I was responding to a question about if dropping dive flaps on the 38 increases your turning, its highly relevent.

I said I'm sure it would help, but it very well might not be worth the drop in speed you would take.

To then begin arguing about it like everyone was somehow misunderstanding your very valuable contribution...well, you can see what prompted my original post

Debrody did misunderstand; he essentially restated what I said, but just added that its fine, and sometimes advantageous to be a bit slower than your opponent. Shida admitedly didn't understand the point.

But damn, apparently we're not supposed to clarify around here  .



I swear coombz, its like you didn't even read the full topic.

[coombz]

I guess I must've been person #3 to misunderstand you then...thereby proving my point about your inability to express yourself with written English *victory dance*

OK I'm just being silly now. But it was that or post the 'Master of the Obvious' image, and that was too much effort

 

[nrshida]

How is my point that you don't want to slow 150mph below your opponent's speed for a small advantage in turn rate in any way contrived?

I think you'll probably never know, as long as you prioritise asserting your correctness above taking the opportunity to learn something.

RTHolmes is right actually, another potentially interesting technical discussion reduced to childish argumentum ad infinitum. I think I shall pursue some of my other activities instead.

Good day 







 

[coombz]

I think I shall pursue some of my other activities instead.

You'll go blind eventually