[TV] She-Hulk: Attorney at Law (*SPOILERS*)

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

NO. /10characters.

- - - Updated - - -



Yet again, NO.

Please post constructively.

[Fabinas]

Yeah, saying "No" doesn't make you right.

You are completely wrong here it isn't even funny anymore. It is verging into sad and pathetic at this point.

I am not trying to be right to anything. You do though.

And there comes my "NO". Meaning i am dismissing your opinions, your arguments and i am not wishing to discuss ANYTHING with you, except on my own terms.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

You're not setting the rules for how someone expresses themselves.

They do. Unless the post is against the rules of this forum, they can express themselves as they wish.

Again, I've never said that he couldn't make multiple posts.

I'm just saying that if all he wanted to do was post his opinion...he's done that. He did it months ago.

[Fabinas]

Follow your own advice. Because how constructive is to attack my opinion on why someone did something in this forum?

You should be seeking his reasoning. Not trying to debate how i perceive his posts.

[rhorle]

You're not setting the rules for how someone expresses themselves.

Posting the work of another with no personal commentary added is not a self-expression. It is the expression of the original author. If you submit a work of another for a school assignment it would plagiarism because it isn't your own expression. It is strange that you don't understand that given the stance you keep trying to push.

- - - Updated - - -

You should be seeking his reasoning. Not trying to debate how i perceive his posts.

You offered your perception of his posts. If you can speak for another then why can't we share how we perceive your own posts? So shouldn't you be following your own advice or is this yet again the case of the preacher never having to follow their own sermon for "reasons".

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Follow your own advice. Because how constructive is to attack my opinion on why someone did something in this forum?

You should be seeking his reasoning. Not trying to debate how i perceive his posts.

I'm not attacking your opinion. I'm "attacking" that you aren't engaging in good faith.

As for his reasoning...he stated his opinion. I accept that he didn't enjoy the show. I'm not telling him that he should enjoy the show. I'm wondering he he's telling other people that they should not have if he's not trying to "win"

[Darththeo]

I am not trying to be right to anything. You do though.

And there comes my "NO". Meaning i am dismissing your opinions, your arguments and i am not wishing to discuss ANYTHING with you, except on my own terms.

I am not saying you are debating with me.
I am saying you are debating while claiming you don't.

Not surprising you can't understand basic points at this time.

Yes, I am not stating an opinion, I am stating an observed fact of your behavior you are denying with your "no."

[Fabinas]

Posting the work of another with no personal commentary added is not a self-expression. It is the expression of the original author. If you submit a work of another for a school assignment it would plagiarism because it isn't your own expression. It is strange that you don't understand that given the stance you keep trying to push.

This is a forum. Not a doctorate presentation. Stop the strawmaning.

If you're unaware of the implied expression of opinion by references, here, you've been taught something useful.

And that will be my last response to an attempt for a debate about nothing.

- - - Updated - - -

When someone denies to exchange words with you about something, you go to ad hominems.

This is the second post you're doing it.

And there's nothing objective EVER on what you post.

[Darththeo]

When someone denies to exchange words with you about something, you go to ad hominems.

This is the second post you're doing it.

And there's nothing objective EVER on what you post.

Dude, don't use ad hominem defense when you have no problem insulting posters outright. Or do you forget you called me a "Debating Ogre" in your first reply to me when all I did was said you misunderstood the point.

here is the post incase your memory is that bad:

He disagreed with the opinion of someone else who though that shitshow was funny. Since when that's to "win"?

Only for the "debating" ogres here, like you, i suppose.

It isn't ad hominem anyway to point out you whining about me debating while you are literally debating with two other posters.
No one has used an ad hominem here. You are a hypocrite based on your own observed actions that anyone can see.

So, let's grant you I used an ad hominem, what good reason would I have to avoid one when you have no problem with insulting me? Don't expect better behavior from posters than you give.

What do you think you are doing with Rhole and Bomber right now? That's debating.
What is your goal with that? If it is to state your opinion and be done with it, you're done, but you keep posting. Therefore, you are trying to "win" the debate.

What was my point? That you called me out for behavior you do. So, yes, what I said is objectively true and you proved it.

[rhorle]

This is a forum.

So are we ignoring how you stated that you should be left alone to state whatever you want with out people responding to those statements? Are you sure you know this is a forum because you want it to be treated as your own personal blog. Your last response is not your actual last response. Lol. You started this "debate about nothing". So if you have a problem with it question why you even started in the first place.

If there is nothing ever objective about what I posted please tell me where there is an opinion by the poster in the post I cited? Your zeal to not be wrong, and insult in the process, has led you into a trap of your own making.

[Fabinas]

Dude, don't use ad hominem defense when you have no problem insulting posters outright. Or do you forget you called me a "Debating Ogre" in your first reply to me when all I did was said you misunderstood the point.

It isn't ad hominem anyway to point out you whining about me debating while you are literally debating with two other posters.
No one has used an ad hominem here. You are a hypocrite based on your own observed actions that anyone can see.

What do you think you are doing with Rhole and Bomber right now? That's debating.

I briefly discussed with Bomber.

I am NEVER debating with you or Rhorle. I know better.

My personal attack was a dismissal of what you said (and are, at least in this forum).

For anything else you say, i refuse to exchange any more words. Thus...

NO.

[Darththeo]

I briefly discussed with Bomber.

I am NEVER debating with you or Rhorle. I know better.

My personal attack was a dismissal of what you said (and are, at least in this forum).

For anything else you say, i refuse to exchange any more words. Thus...

NO.

This is literally debating.
Therefore, you are lying and continue to lie.

Dude, if you can't be honest, leave the forum; it will be better for your health if you are this delusional about what is happening. You are either gaslighting yourself or attempting to gaslight me, either is pretty sad.

And you are literally debating three people now and claiming you aren't.

- - - Updated - - -

So are we ignoring how you stated that you should be left alone to state whatever you want with out people responding to those statements? Are you sure you know this is a forum because you want it to be treated as your own personal blog. Your last response is not your actual last response. Lol. You started this "debate about nothing". So if you have a problem with it question why you even started in the first place.

If there is nothing ever objective about what I posted please tell me where there is an opinion by the poster in the post I cited? Your zeal to not be wrong, and insult in the process, has led you into a trap of your own making.

Oh, according to him, he doesn't "debate"

[Syegfryed]

No, ther's no such rule...and I'm not arguing that there should be.

I'm saying that if all he wanted to do was state his opinion...he wouldn't still be posting in this thread. He's arguing that his opinion is the right one to have. He's trying to "win" even after he stated that there was no "winning"

And how do you know he is trying to "win" just because he was talking about a joke in the show? that is an awful amount of projection and speak volumes of how you people act in those forums, cause to me he was surprised someone actually found that bit funny.

Apparently for you, he is trying to win, therefore, you have to make him lose, so you can win, right? i know you like to get the final comment in those discussions but that is a bit too far, even after your comment about "posting constructive" that have to be a deliberate joke.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

And how do you know he is trying to "win" just because he was talking about a joke in the show? that is an awful amount of projection and speak volumes of how you people act in those forums, cause to me he was surprised someone actually found that bit funny.

Apparently for you, he is trying to win, therefore, you have to make him lose, so you can win, right? i know you like to get the final comment in those discussions but that is a bit too far, even after your comment about "posting constructive" that have to be a deliberate joke.

I don't care if people don't like the show. No show is universally loved.

I just don't know why the people that don't like the show can't just acccept that other people do. You're not "wrong" for not liking the show...but the people that do aren't "wrong" either.

[Gumble]

And how do you know he is trying to "win" just because he was talking about a joke in the show? that is an awful amount of projection and speak volumes of how you people act in those forums, cause to me he was surprised someone actually found that bit funny.

Apparently for you, he is trying to win, therefore, you have to make him lose, so you can win, right? i know you like to get the final comment in those discussions but that is a bit too far, even after your comment about "posting constructive" that have to be a deliberate joke.

It is always a fight to win for these kind of people. People who have had absolutely no real hardship in their life feel the need to pick fights to feel the masturbatory dopemine high of winning without actually having someone else there.

They take their views and just assume that anyone who has differing ones, no matter how many or how common, are wrong, evil, and must be fought through their screen without ever self reflecting and thinking "maybe its me".

Don't be surprised, they seem to love these kinds of shows and pile into the threads of poorly written programs similar to this.

[Syegfryed]

Don't be surprised, they seem to love these kinds of shows and pile into the threads of poorly written programs similar to this.

And most of then don't even defend, or try to defend the show, just attack other people talking bad about it. rings of power thread had lots of it

[paxen]

And most of then don't even defend, or try to defend the show, just attack other people talking bad about it. rings of power thread had lots of it

Hey, this is my one and only reply to you.

We've discussed plenty about what we like and don't like about She-Hulk in this thread, which you would know if you actually cared about discussing the show instead of just coming on here and regurgitating Critical Drinker's lies, I mean talking points.

We've all been put off by the CGI to varying degrees, we would have preferred it to be stronger on the legal bits, I did not like the wedding episode at all (can't remember if that's general point or not), we thought that the humor didn't always land. But there's also bits we like, which we've tried talking about around your and your crew's spam of meaningless hatred throughout the thread.

[Darththeo]

Hey, this is my one and only reply to you.

We've discussed plenty about what we like and don't like about She-Hulk in this thread, which you would know if you actually cared about discussing the show instead of just coming on here and regurgitating Critical Drinker's lies, I mean talking points.

We've all been put off by the CGI to varying degrees, we would have preferred it to be stronger on the legal bits, I did not like the wedding episode at all (can't remember if that's general point or not), we thought that the humor didn't always land. But there's also bits we like, which we've tried talking about around your and your crew's spam of meaningless hatred throughout the thread.

I don't think Syeg understand that people can argue against things they find to be false, while not actually defending the show.

I encounter this when I argue with people on the Star Wars Sequels where people accuse me of "liking them" when I argue against bad takes on the sequels. They aren't good, but doesn't mean I have to accept every complaint against them because of that. Even shows like She-hulk, I can't say I liked the show, I enjoyed the parts I did, but not enough to say I want to watch the series again. However, when someone states that show does something it doesn't, I am going to point out they are wrong.

I rather discuss the actual faults of a series or movie, and not the imagined slights or projected bias that is put on the show.

[Rocksteady 87]

I don't think Syeg understand that people can argue against things they find to be false, while not actually defending the show.

Of course he doesn't. That's largely because the Venn Diagram of those who don't understand the show was making fun of people like themselves and those who personify the Dunning-Kruger Effect is pretty much a circle.

[Endus]

I don't think Syeg understand that people can argue against things they find to be false, while not actually defending the show.

Also that there's been a weird explosion of semantically meaningless accusations in general, not just against this show but plenty of other media. Arguments like "the writing is bad". That means nothing. You need specifics, and they need to not account for taste;

Are there massive holes in the plotting that aren't explained by the end of the show? The meta-narrative in She-Hulk, whether you like it or not, does explain the holes, and calls them out explicitly, they're not errors.

Is the dialogue terrible? You've got to be REAL careful here, because "realistic dialogue" and "natural dialogue" and "stylized dialogue" are all entirely valid (and the list doesn't end there), and just because you don't like a particular style does not make that style "bad". the LotR trilogy of films' dialogue is incredibly stylized, and lauded for it. Natural dialogue is really rare because it includes all the weird vocal tics people actually use. Dialogue in fiction is generally designed to communicate narrative material, not to be "natural", and that's a good thing. I can't really find faults in the dialogue in She-Hulk. It's not amazing or something, but there's nothing wrong with it.

Humor. You not getting a joke or not finding it funny is subjective, and doesn't constitute an argument. If everyone hates it, you might be able to make a case, but otherwise, "it's just not for me" is the only conclusion you can reasonably draw.

"The writing is bad" doesn't mean anything. It's a phrase used by people who can't be more specific because their problems are subjective, and they want to pretend they're objective.