User blog comment:LegoI3rickI3uilder/Debate:Amount of Admins/@comment-4845243-20130709154148/@comment-1693968-20130710111917

I said there were several other examples, which I can easily mention if you want them. It'd be far more efficient if you ask for them, instead of repeatedly saying my argument is weak because of lack of factual examples.

Here's an example: Rio used to have a reputation for making totally awesome comments. Everyone always read them, because they expected something. Rio still makes great comments, but people no longer go around telling everyone they see that Rio is the best commenter ever.

I was only clarifying the word because you didn't understand what I'm saying, so I'm just going to blame it on you. JK, but I would disagree with it being a fallacy based on the situation.

I'd have to disagree with you on the reiterating my points part. First of all, you weren't just having me reiterate them. You said there was an absence of factual examples, not just a lack. If you wanted me to give more examples, or clarify the ones I did, then efficiency would have been to just ask me to do so, rather than saying I was giving no examples.

You just said in the paragraph above you were questioning the validity of my points. But I do know what you mean.

My argument is built on probability, you are correct. However, you're incorrect when you say that makes it weak. Again, I repeat myself for the fourth time. There are more examples than just the one I gave you. Above, I gave another, and there are still many more.

When I was talking about my credibility, I was talking about the evidence you were asking for. You said that you needed a source, or evidence to back what I was saying. I said that there was not such a source, but that my credibility should be good enough for you to believe me.

I think I saw the No True Scotsman in your comment like five times. You be careful, now Obi. Lots of people look up to you, and you can't be a bad example.