Originally Posted by Andysol
Hey look. I quoted your own words! I can't believe you think morality is apples top priority.
See how only doing partial quotes can make it read whatever you want to read? It's almost like I've heard that before...
Ah yes, there it is.
When your argument is so empty that you feel the need to manipulate a quote, it's pathetic. Really, you need to just stop while you're behind.
I cut out preceding sentences because I didn't think they were relevant and didn't add any particular context of significance, and because unnecessarily big quotation blocks in a thread are annoying. Your manipulation deliberately removes context and plain intention and thus is not at all comparable. I thought he was responding to the last part of the paragraph, since when I quote someone I want my comment to follow on directly from the last part of what they said. If they don't then conversations become mangled and hard to follow.
I've invited him to clarify if that isn't what he meant, so your attack on my pathetic and empty argument is somewhat overblown. I understood his point to be one thing, and if that's not what he meant, then that's fine, all he has to do is say so.
EDIT: I mean seriously, look at the full quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Originally Posted by mistercow
Apple has been convicted of price fixing, anti poaching tactics, there was also a case previously about Apple saving GPS location data of users despite them saying they weren't. You're kidding yourself if you think morality is their top priority.
You’re kidding yourself if you think this is the truth.
Are you saying that TS was claiming that Apple hasn't been convicted of price fixing and anti poaching tactics? Because they have (aside: I'm not sure if "convicted" is technically the right word, but if that's the argument being made then it's a semantic and rubbish one).
Are you saying that TS was claiming that Apple haven't been caught saving GPS location data when they said they weren't? Because they have.
If TS was doing that then he is demonstrably, provably, false.
I gave TS the credit for not claiming that the demonstrably, provable truths were false, and assumed he meant the last thing (which he has aped with his sentence structure, implying so). You're saying that I manipulated the quote to make him look bad? Manipulating the quote removed the obviously true stuff!
Patent absurdity in your argument. And you have the gall to call me pathetic and my argument empty?
Edited by Crowley - 6/23/14 at 4:41am