So do I understand this right: you read my post, you understood the point I made, you don’t like me, you cherry-picked one of my posts, you twisted its meaning into something you know I didn’t mean, you post it, because you want to make me feel bad?
Not sure what I ever did to you.
I don’t think I have mischaracterized Komis arguments (and vice versa) and we have earnestly taken each other’s responses at face value. We just heavily disagree on opinions and interpretations. There might be tense exchanges but that’s about it.
You’re the one bringing in a lot of negativity here. Do you think this conversation about me is really constructive? It’s certainly not the topic at hand.
“Losing money” or “Paying Money” is still distinct from “Not getting more money”. All else being equal, a party that goes from positive income to 0 is going to outlast a party that goes from 0 income to negative.
A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be “attacking a straw man”.
If you look at this thread there are some good examples for strawman arguments. I wished there was a better discussion of the topic and not of those strawman arguments and personal allegations.