14505 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I would point out that Non Sequitor specifically refers to a comment/argument that has nothing (or little) to do with the original statement, which was clearly the situation. However you may ignore me, based on the overwhelming support of your initiail post. Lmao.
For your edification, all fallacies are non sequiturs; the terms, "Fallacy", and, "Non sequitur", are synonymous. Nothing follows from a fallacy.
Consider yourself welcomed for being disabused of yet another of your misconceptions, gratis.
Stick with your juvenile attempts at crass penis size humor. That seems to be your given forte, pandering to the lowest common denominator.
1) A non sequitor is a fallacy. A fallacy is not necessarily a non sequitor. They are no more synonymous than 'square' and 'rectangle.' Nice try, but again, you are wrong.
2) Your last sentence is a far better example of an ad hominem than the orignal post you complained about. Well done.
3) It seems everyone but you grasped your unintended double entendre in your initial complaint. Penis size is the order of the day. Almost by definition, penis humor is juvenile and crass - if you expected a high-brow response to your complaint about clock size, I'm sorry to disappoint you.
It’s very obvious that you have no idea what a, “non sequitur” is, what the literal translation from Latin says, or Even how to SPELL , “NON SEQUITUR”.
You’re grotesquely uneducated, resentful of and spiteful towards those who aren’t; and it’s a thankless impossible task that you’re trying to foist upon me, that of educating you.
Your replies are an astounding documentary record of your penchant for shameless public displays of contemptuous ignorance, compulsive disingenuousness, and depraved unsophisticated attempts at humor.
And by the way, my original complaint was that the Blitz Clock should be made SIZE ADJUSTABLE. It’s very revealing how you would distort that into a bizarre psychological self-defense/projection mechanism.
I will no longer post replies to your posts because deceitful pretentious mentalities of your ilk just aren’t worth my keystrokes or time.
Enjoy your BLISS.
Compensating for the blatant grammatical screw up in the thread title, are we? :P
our unintended double entendre in your initial complaint. Penis size is the order of the day. Almost by definition, penis humor is juvenile and crass - if you expected a high-brow response to your complaint about clock size, I'm sorry to disappoint you.
I tip my hat off to you, sir.
First thanks for the reply in bold and also the promise not to post replies. Chess.com would be far worse if every flustered poster used bold text, but your promise to post less offers some compensation in return.
I'll ignore all your vitriol, personal attacks, and assertions that my explanation is bad because I misspelled a word (another excellent example of an ad hominem, though - your continued practical application of a term you improperly applied at the beginning of this thread is encouraging!) Instead I'll simply point out that if you wanted people to focus on "size adjustable" (as you so feverntly point out in capital letters), maybe you shouldn't have titled the thread "Clocks is TOO SMALL" (with you putting "too small" in caps).
I'm surprised you know latin so well KtFork when your thread title is clearly in ebonics. Also it would seem that Seaeagle has garnered more support from the followers of the thread then its founder.
P.S. my clock size doesnt matter because im married and I dont get to use it anymore.
malurn now trots out the old Ad Populum fallacy. This is more proof that this forum has become a fathomless source of brazen ignorance and incorrigible idiocy…
My only concern was that, in the interest of fairness, the clock should be made size adjustable so that all players, regardless of their visual acuity, would be able to easily see the respective times remaining on the clock.
Instead, the terminally unemployed comedians and simpletons here have decided to sidetrack that genuine issue with idiotic commentary which has no consequence in this matter whatsoever.
The clock is NOT too small.
So, you like really big clocks huh?
It’s very obvious that you have no idea.....(snipped)
Wow, the OP complains about Ad Hominem attacks & then does one himself, in bold print, no less! According to Graham's "Hierarchy of Disagreement," the Ad Hominem attack is next to last in this group. At the absolute bottom is Name Calling, which, if you read the complete post of which I quoted part of, the OP also indulges in. It takes more than big words to cover such a thin skin. Personally, I thought the tone of this entire thread (or what it degenerated to) was pretty darned funny.
It wasn't enough that you have a superior intellect to OP's? You had to hack his account, too?
The fact is that as a result of a lot of "terminally unemployed comedians and simpletons" having a bit of fun, your poorly written request placed in the wrong forum (use Site Feedback for site feedback) has a far better chance of being noticed by Chess.com staff.
I realize that your egocentrism makes you blind to this, and instead forces you to focus on the fact that, once again, everyone is out to get you. (But then you do create a colossal target; well, except for there around the TOO SMALL clock area.) But if you focus on your original intent, we have been nothing but your allies.
I don't play live chess at all, so it's a moot point to me. I do understand about not being able to see well, though. I can leave with the following thought, "haters gonna hate."
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by fianchetto123 a few minutes ago
Is there any chance that a 2700 rated player can beat a 1300 rated player?
by Boyangzhao 3 minutes ago
by ManUser 3 minutes ago
Bronstein's Mainline Queen Sac?!
by NimzoPatzer 6 minutes ago
Chess.com Computer level 10
by gchess33 10 minutes ago
by MagnusKarlysen 10 minutes ago
Does Anyone Know Where I Can Find this Chess Set?
by michaelgravel 15 minutes ago
Female chess players forced to wear hijab
by ab121705 20 minutes ago
Post your best miniatures here
by mariosuperlative 27 minutes ago
G Butterman Chess Board
by wiscmike 28 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
Try the new Chess.com!
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!