Summary
There were people that agreed with my position who didn’t vote because they wanted a third option
I’m assuming you’re talking about this
Yes I used your analogy, but the point I was making with it was appropriate to the comment I was responding to, and if it works against you as well, that’s even more reason to do it. It saves time, which is important when you’re arguing against the forum mob
This comparison doesn’t work because you are comparing having your money taken away and then having a chance of getting it restored vs not having your money taken away and having a chance of gaining money. A more accurate comparison would be having your money taken away and having a chance of getting it restored vs having your money taken away and having a chance of gaining money, because I wasn’t advocating for people who hadn’t lost items yet to lose items
Because that is a joke poll, and the funnier option is “I agree” regardless of whether it’s in the minority or not, although it would probably be in the minority. Personally, when I look at a poll that is very lopsided, it’s funnier to me to make it even more lopsided, not to even it out and make it look unexceptional in its vote distribution
That’s not what ragebait is. Ragebait is intended to make you angry. You being angry at something doesn’t make it ragebait
Yes, but your argument that it was bait rests on the idea that I wasn’t putting forward a believable take. That was implied, and now you’re explicitly stating it below
Ok. Well then, again, you’d be wrong
Spend another 9 months. My argument is not this
You can make jokes and still put forward a serious argument at the same time. You can even be genuinely toxic, and still have a genuine argument, many of the responses to his post are a case in point. Furthermore, there is a clear difference between his attitude and responses back then and now, now that he is actually baiting