20255, Your first mistake is...|
Posted by REDeye, Sat Jan-20-01 11:54 AM
...assuming that no one knows me simply because you don't know me.
Your second mistake is not taking the time to figure out who I am before attacking me. Know your enemy. I have been posting on these boards for what many would consider to be a fair amount of time (6, 7 months or so). I have made solid contributions to many a discussion on film, enough to have, if I may be so bold, established in the very least that I have some valid, educated, experienced-based opinions on movies and the movie industry. Not to say everyone agrees with me or that I am always right. But, in a nutshell, I know what I'm talking about.
Third mistake? Forgetting where you are. Here on okayplayer.com, people often engage in prognostication as well as humor. Last time I checked, these were accepted practices here. You may not like my prediction, and you may not think the wording of it was particularly funny. That's you prerogative. I also recognize that responding to something one doesn't like with personal attacks is also accepted practice here. As is gay bashing, by the way.
Your fourth mistake would be somehow forgetting that the validity of the argument is unrelated to the credibility of the speaker. Of course, I may not have presented a very convincing argument for the probable poor quality of the film in my first post. But I think I made a strong case in my follow-up. It's not iron-clad, which I freely admit, but it should certainly give one pause. As far as naming sources, I'm not sure at this point that I could name someone and have you go, "Oh, okay, now I agree with you." Yes, you know who the people are, as they are themselves okayplayers. No, ?uest was not one of them. He doesn't call it garbage, but he clearly doesn't think it's all that good. But add him to the "panned" list and I now have three different, credible (in my opinion) sources that say the movie is subpar. (The non-quorum consensus seems to be that Tariq is the best thing in the movie.) Still, that doesn't mean that the movie was pulled simply because of the quality, so I am speculating. If you don't like speculation, tough. But simply saying that the screening has been cancelled "due to a majority vote of the producers who have pulled the film" (from the Slamdance website) practically begs speculation.
I could go on, as you have made at least two other blatant mistakes in your attempted rebuttal. But I'll go with this as a summary:
You may not know me, but other people here do. Regardless, the points I have made stand on their own not as fact, but as educated and insigthful opinion. This is true whether you believe I have "credibility" or not.
It's nice, Tom, that you stand by everything you said. But that fact is, you haven't said anything - except announce yourself as a mean-spirited malcontent with homophobic tendencies. You want my grandmother to be stabbed with a fork? You stand by that? Wow. And I don't even know what the hell "cock fluffing" is.
If you have anything else to add on the subject of the film, the validity of speculation or methods of argumentation, feel free to reply. If you just want to wish further ill on me and my family, please, take it to the email.
I'm still writing 20th century on all my checks.