Legal Stuff & Discussion in English

[Shtirliz]

you don't HAVE to explain anything to me unless I ask for an explanation.

first you TOOK her example in TOTO and argued it in TOTO. after I pointed there were a couple of locigal holes in your assessment, you simply started piling up statements. your argument collapsed.

You didnt answer the Q

[Птиц]

You didnt answer the Q

it's too vague (and lacking grammatically)

care to rephrase?

[Манюня]

too lazy to read the whole thing

Shtirlic, what are u guys arguing about? Give me a quick summary.

[Птиц]

uh

well - if an argument (in this case, an example) has no merit logically, you simply dismiss it as irrelevant. if you start applying logic to it, you have to remain logical.

[Shtirliz]

итьс тоо вагуе (анд лацкинг грамматицаллы)

царе то репхрасе?

Oh you cant make it out becasue of my grammatical mistakes?

[Птиц]

like I said, you started arguing with Milka about her example applying logic (to some degree) first. when I pointed out your logic was flawed (not based on reasoning), you used fallacy (proving baseless statements with other baseless statements)

[Shtirliz]

too lazy to read the whole thing

Shtirlic, what are u guys arguing about? Give me a quick summary.

Ок посторяйся понят логику аргумента- Милька основала аргумент на том что паралагал говорил - правильно. А откуда мы ето знаем? Мы [ assume] что ето правильно, что паралегал знала очём она говорить.

Я не согласем с етой [assumption]. Человек за полгода не может разаобраца в теории, развечто в практичских вариантах. К томуже Милька сама сказал что девочка ета безопытая на тот момент. Тоесть совсем не обязательно что то что паралегал говорила - правильно.

Следовательно ,если паралегал несла чюш, то и агрумент разваливаеца.

Basicly, this.

[Shtirliz]

like I said, you started arguing with Milka about her example applying logic (to some degree) first. when I pointed out your logic was flawed (not based on reasoning), you used fallacy (proving baseless statements with other baseless statements)

Ok, once again,.

Are my grammatical misstakes so bad, you dont understand what im saying?

[Птиц]

Ok, once again,.

Are my grammatical misstakes so bad, you dont understand what im saying?

you'd better believe it (your Russian, especially)

you wanna argue the point or discuss your grammar?

[Shtirliz]

you'd better believe it (your Russian, especially)

you wanna argue the point or discuss your grammar?

I cant argue with you becasue you dont udnerstad what i write. But if you do understand, after all, why would you point oit my grammatical mistakes? Are they so material or its it because of the lack of arguments?;)