I’ll also note that anytime I see the phrase “come on” in debate I perceived that the person that said it has lost, knows they lost (usually subconsciously) and are literally begging for leeway.
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
> I’ll also note that anytime I see the phrase “come on” in debate I perceived that the person that said it has lost, knows they lost (usually subconsciously) and are literally begging for leeway
Oh, the irony. After you scold me on the need to assume "the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says", you immediately proceed to interpret my comment as "literally begging for leeway". I guess my comment was not deserving of "strongest plausible interpretation", or even interpreting it at face value? No, you'll go as far as psychoanalyzing my subconscious where I "know I lost". Wow.
Welcome to HN, this is how we do things here:
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
From the guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).
I’ll also note that anytime I see the phrase “come on” in debate I perceived that the person that said it has lost, knows they lost (usually subconsciously) and are literally begging for leeway.