"2. I think Invictus nailed it on the head when he said Putin is a contrarian; at least sometimes it really does come across to me as if he's picking the other side just to pick the other side, which I don't see many here doing, at least not all that often."
And I'm not?

We all know you do, Fasces. But then most of us who like to troll a bit (yes, I include myself) tend to pick the opposing view just to have some fun. We like to play devil's advocate if you will.

No, Fasces349. You're just an idiot.

@Draugnar: Whats the difference between devil's advocate and political trolling?
@Invictus: your right, cause all idiots are able to skip a grade in a gifted school

Speaking as someone who was in the "gifted" program at school, almost by definition someone with that label is an idiot.

And even if you are really, really good at geometry or finger painting, I can't think of a better word to describe a Canadian fascist than idiot. Well actually I can, but they're much less nice.

It doesn't matter that Putin is a contrarian. Fuck anyone that likes to argue on the internet has to be a contrarian. The problem with Putin is that he's always blind to the other side of his argument and offers no support for his claims. When someone offers support against his opinion he just ignores it.

Perfect example: The argument between me and Putin regarding hackers. He was wrong so instead he attacked me personally. When I came back with an argument over top his opinion, he just moved on to the next topic.

Putin is a troll worth muting, not a debater worth acknowledging.

"I also do not disagree with certain people just because we've disagreed elsewhere." - This is very true. Remember that debate about women's traditional muslim garb that went on for days? And yet Putin and I have agreed about other stuff since then.

"The problem with Putin is that he's always blind to the other side of his argument and offers no support for his claims."

You've got to be kidding me. I've posted more data and citations to back my arguments than you have on average, certainly, and probably most people. Just because you're pissed about the hacker debate you make these ridiculous claims about me that completely ignores the dozens of research paper-like debates we've had here. That says more about your willingness to ignore inconvenient evidence than it does me.

And yeah, I wasn't interested in doing a research paper on the morality of hacker journalism. Most the civilized world condemned News of the World and the scandal is threatening to tear apart the Cameron coalition. I could care less that you have no respect for privacy.

@Mafia
Yeah, I had somewhat agreed with him on a few occasions too. But I still didn't like the guy and he was more a troll than a like-mind. Plus he had no respect for anyone in his discussions. If he had showed an interest in hearing anything but his own voice, he'd of treated others worth more respect and not destroyed any credibility his overly ad hominem arguments may have had.

with* not worth.

Christ, of all people I wouldn't expect Geofram, who've I had maybe 2 or 3 "debates" with, to be the most pissy about me.

The problem with Putin is that he has generally already considered the points you intend to make to counter his argument, weighed them up , and dismissed them. Thus in his reply he has a tendancy to come across as somewhat inflexible and closed minded.

The other problem with Putin is that he has far greater reserves of energy to dedicate to finding evidence and writing detailed arguments than most of us can ever be bothered to gather. As a result he is annoyingly hard to prove wrong even in the areas where he is blatantly stark raving mad.

Some may describe such behaviour as an admirable approach to forum debates, and worthy of great praise and respect...

I call it cheating :p.

I think I have discovered why you guys don't like arguing with me.
Like Putin, I do this: "he has generally already considered the points you intend to make to counter his argument, weighed them up , and dismissed them. Thus in his reply he has a tendancy to come across as somewhat inflexible and closed minded."
But unlike Putin, I don't do this: "he has far greater reserves of energy to dedicate to finding evidence and writing detailed arguments than most of us can ever be bothered to gather."

@Octavious, I only have one question.
Which is it you've given Putin access to, your mouth or your anus? Or perhaps both?

The kid had no ability to have his points won and was always full of fallacy after fallacy. His only tool was attacking his opponent to encourage emotional responses that detracted from their better researched comments.

You got that he was inflexible and closed minded. Once you add "notoriously bullheaded and more often wrong than right," you'll have the boy-troll pegged.

"Which is it you've given Putin access to, your mouth or your anus? Or perhaps both?"

There you go. That's how you convince people that someone *else* is bad-tempered and does nothing but engage in personal attacks. Obviously Geofram is who we should all run to for lessons on cool reason and mutual respect.

Anyway, this surly Canadian can go to mute-land. I won't have that lecher ruining my lunch with his perverse and disgusting posts.

Bit harsh, don't you think, Geo?

The effort Putin puts in to the debates he cares about is undeniable. That fact that he is almost always wrong is neither here nor there. Good Lord, if you want to attack people based upon the fallacies they come out with then you'd be at permanent war with almost everyone here!

But do you not understand that fallacies undermine the purpose of debate? You've clearly not understood the difference between fallacy and being wrong.

Putin knew how to google and spent most of his day trolling. That did not equal effort.

This is getting ridiculous. Basically the point of this thread is that Putin is arrogant and pigheaded, and yet everyone keeps saying "Nah, he's not so bad aside from being completely and totally wrong about everything."
Being arrogant and pigheaded in a thread about someone else being arrogant? How deliciously ironic.

@Geof - I have already muted Putin for just the reasons you describe.

Everyone =/= the few people that were Putin worshipers.
No doubt they've been sent here after Putin left.
I guess the collective mind that supported this thread will have to make them exit too.

@Draug! Glad to see you amongst the crowd that has already done the same.
Putin was the drunk girl puke stain on your favourite party shirt.
Good thing Kestas gave us a cleaning service.

Sort of weird (not to mention cowardly) that two people here are posting attacks against me while having me muted. You want to ignore me but continue talking shit about me just the same?

@ Geofram

Sorry, what on earth are you talking about? I hate to burst your idealistic bubble, but the purpose of debates here is little more than entertainment and distraction. If you're lucky you may stumble across the occasional nugget of a point you'd never considered, but such things are few and far between. Putin, and the arguments against him, can often be the most entertaining things here.

...and he does produce more nuggets than most.

"Putin was the drunk girl puke stain on your favourite party shirt."

God I wish we had .sigs for our postings. This one would be mine!

@ Putin

Can you see when someone has muted you, then?

@Oct - Unfortunately they are brown, smelly, and made of something I like to call horseshit.

@ Draugnar

Even horseshit has its uses