An overwhelming reason to move back to Film...

Started Aug 29, 2014 | Discussions thread
bford Senior Member • Posts: 1,489
Re: An overwhelming reason to move back to Film...
3

Glenn NK wrote:

bford wrote:

Austinian wrote:

bford wrote:

Austinian wrote:

bford wrote:

Austinian wrote:

bford wrote:

They are not "meaningless arguments." In any debate someone is either right or less wrong than the other person.

Yes, in a technical argument where there are relatively clear-cut facts.

Many of the debates on DPR are almost entirely about personal preferences and priorities, where the "facts" (such as they are) are of much less importance than beliefs and opinions, and often chosen very selectively and manipulated to suit the posters' agendas.

This thread isn't about "many of the debates on DPR" and the recent threads on film vs digital have been about "clear-cut facts."

I'm not referring to this thread. You said "in any debate". "Any debate", not just one or some.

My remarks are clearly focusing on this particular thread and the other threads that it is obviously referring to. If you want to talk about debates in general and "many of the debates on DPR" then feel free to start another thread.

In that case, your statement should have been more precise.

If you sincerely believe that all debates on DPR are about verifiable facts, with clear-cut "rights" and "wrongs", you are welcome to that belief, but I stand by my comment.

I never said "that all debates on DPR are about verifiable facts," only the recent ones that this particular thread is referring to. How do you get that from this:

"This thread isn't about "many of the debates on DPR" and the recent threads on film vs digital have been about "clear-cut facts.""

I clearly referenced the exact quote I based my comment on:

"In any debate someone is either right or less wrong than the other person."

That's all. You said it. I disagreed.

Everything else is interpretation, and if our discussion continues, it will be based entirely on our individual notion of just what the subject is rather than any verifiable facts, validating my original comment.

I could have also said that it is possible for both sides to be wrong on a matter that is entirely subjective, but that is not what the "subject" of thread is referring to. Perhaps you should start a thread on grammar for those that are intellectually challenged by the concept of context.

My work here is done.

What's that, to be confused, disruptive, and off-topic?

Q. E. D.

You actually expect most people to understand what that means?

-- hide signature --

Glenn NK

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow