That's a different logical fallacy, a red herring. You brought up a bunch of irrelevant nonsense rather than addressing what I said. The general theme there is that you're just trying to find something, anything at all, to pin on me and attack me for. While I'm discussing something very specific: that I was asked a loaded question. 

36 minutes ago, thonglor10 said:

You married a ladyboy, I get it. I'm not judging you, nor anybody else who did the same. 

 

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, thonglor10 said:

While I'm discussing something very specific: that I was asked a loaded question. 

 

So you are off-topic in your own topic.

 

But other than that, looking stupid for showing a lack of understanding "loaded questions" after you linked to it (in error, out of desperation) and failing to learn from your mistake. But really that's just pathetic hiding on the part of a big baby who won't own up.

 

Big babies demand they get to talk about what they want to talk about because they're just babies who haven't learned the outside world is bigger than they are and doesn't have to care what a big baby asks or cries about.

Quote

So you are off-topic in your own topic.

 

You're the one trying to change the topic. Your first reply was disputing that it was a loaded question. That is the discussion you and i are having. You're trying to change the topic to some attack on me you think you can defend.

 

Quote

looking stupid for showing a lack of understanding "loaded questions" 

 

You're projecting. I wouldn't say you look stupid, just uneducated. 

 

Quote

Big babies demand they get to talk about what they want to talk about

 

You're projecting again. And waving the white flag with all these juvenile insults. Realizing you're intellectually and factually outmatched, your last resort is to throw a tantrum. 

 

Still waiting for you to explain how it wasn't a loaded question. Especially since you admitted it was in your last post:

 

Quote

there being implications for your actions for which you refuse to take responsibility.

 

You have no proof I've done anything I need to take responsibility for. You're assuming it. The picture could be of me for all you know. And here you are asking me a question that assumes guilt. A loaded question.

9 minutes ago, thonglor10 said:

You're....

 

Loaded is past tense and descriptive, like after placing one thing - a bullet - into another - a gun.

 

Your own link that you clearly don't understand asks "Do you still beat your wife?" - key word: still. Question is as if it is a fact already, the speaker has placed this fact like a bullet into the gun of whatever new reality (wife-beating) the speaker is trying to establish.

 

The poster asked a grammatically different question. You could have accused him of trying to imply something. It still doesn't mean he did actually intend to imply it, in fact that was my point given the scant supporting evidence.

 

 

thonglor10 I'm sorry things are not looking good for you at this moment.

 

Removed a troll post and the replies to it.