I KNOW ABOUT SOCRATIC DIOLOG, IDIOT. . . but I AM NOT PLAYING YOUR GAME, ASSHAT. This is a civil discussion forum, not your personal playhouse for you to play games in. What you were doing was not Socratic Dialog but baiting and taunting and insulting a fellow freeper. YOU ARE A TROLL. You are not interested in a dialog, you are interested in disruption. ASSHAT.
I certainly don't know who taught you about Socrates and Socratic Dialog, but it was not what you were doing, ASSHAT. Socrates would not use the logical fallacies you sprinkle throughout your replies. . . especially your ad hominem attacks which YOU started in your third reply to me. . . when you denigrated my expertise, ignoring the article I politely posted in reply to your question asking for numbers and data. . . and you questioned my background and honesty and my grasp on reality, even though I was citing the authoritative article which proved my point. . . and you again started with the damned "SPARKY" CRAP which you have used in the past!
"Hahaha and you claim you have a degree in economics?Sorry Sparky, but your story doesn’t come close to reality.
That kind of response to a polite post is not intended to generate a dialog but to spark a flame war. . . something prohibited by Jim Robinson on FreeRepublic.
I politely requested you to use my proper Freepname, as I have numerous times before, but you DOUBLED DOWN with your insulting "Sparky" sobriquet, obviously intended to enrage me. . . and others you use it on. IT is intentionally denigrating and meant to be so. That is not by any stretch of the imagination "Socratic" in nature.
You then mischaracterize ctdonath2's polite reply criticizing your comment to me, by mis-stating what HE said, turning it completely upside down. . . lying. . . and insult him by impugning his reading ability in the process:
"So I can buy a two year old iPhone for exactly the same price as a Two year old Android?You just disproved Sparky's entire thesis that iPhones have a higher resale value.
Maybe you should try honing up on your reading skills... hahahah
Then you escalate even more, calling me a "dumbass" and then including all Apple users, throwing insults around freely, in your bile:
""Ah Sparky you still miss the point by a mile. You still do not get it. Why pay premium FOR ANY phone dumbass? You are so enamoured by your gAdgets you’ve actually talked yourself into the delusion that they somehow make better emails and texts and phonecalls etc. They don’t sparky all it adds up to is you are purchasing a status symbol and then you attempt rationalise it daily with how intelligent Applebots are became Apple made a bazillion dollars in profit because Applebots bought over priced phones."
Then you lied outright, claiming you never asked for data about iPhones having better resale values. . . claiming I ASSUMED something you asked specifically for:
"See this is your problem right here. YOU ASSUMED I was making a request to prove your point If I had asked for such I would have stated it this way, PROVE your thesis post the numbers.Instead I said post the numbers and you know why. Because as I stated in the beginning there is no logical reason to pay premium for a smartphone when one is doing the actions listed in the previous posts. Why because they all do the same things. And when YOU post the numbers that CONFIRMS my point beyond a shadow of a doubt it not only is QED for my Premise BUT it drives you insane and that Sparky is the best part. Trading in a phone and still paying premium is not saving money in anyway shape or form ESPECIALLY when it is on a contract. Awhile back I asked a question on another thread about Apple why the article stated that Apple contracts tended to be over 100 bucks a month while Android users were about half. It makes much more sense now. You should know Sparky that when I ask you a question I already know the answer. Its called Socratic Dialog its how one proves a premise!
Thanks for Playing. hahaha
NONE of that is justifiable. It is boorish, bad behavior even for a 13 year old, and certainly not what should be the behavior on FreeRepublic between Conservatives. YOU act like a Liberal Democrat. . . using nasty insults to forward your lack of facts. BAH!
i could go through all of them but basically it start with your first ad homienm attack here in post 91 You are one of those people who know the price of everything but the value of nothing.
I had not even replied to you once on this thread and you started up. Now you are crying about getting the favor returned. That is why you got your Sparky name right there and claiming to be a economist thus proves you right is one of the lamer fallacies to use.
then you whine about this one:
"Then you escalate even more, calling me a "dumbass" and then including all Apple users, throwing insults around freely, in your bile:"
Ok that one is in reply to post 120 in which you said:
Look, idiot. That is not my story but authoritative source with links, proving my points. It compares devices at the same age and their RESALE VALUES, not a BRAND NEW iPhone against two year old Androids. . . the only "new" item there was an Android and it couldn't hold it's value. The ONLY phone that held any value was the iPhone. IDIOT!
So here is the bottom line don't start off with ad hominem then cry when gets sent back to you threefold. And don;t expect to use a fallacy and not get it hammered into the ground.
Moving on: When I asked you to post your numbers I knew your numbers would prove my point. And they did. It never mattered a whit that all that blather about cost of ownership made buying a new Apple cheaper than buying a new Android Remember I never claimed at any time that apples did not have a high resale value. my whole premise was there is no reason to pay premium for a smartphone when they all do the same things like taking pictures phone calls texting etc.
Especially when most of the things people do do not even require the fastest bestest phone. All of those things can be done on phones that are even 4 years old or more. See you make claims that you claim refute the premise but in reality are nothing more than red herrings and false analogy and your favorite Appeal to Authority.
See Sparky you don't get to cry foul when your are the first to do so.