My high school didn't have a debate team. ^_^Onideus_Mad_Hatter wrote:The point I was making is that there is no single argument. Maybe when you're on the high school debate team and you're lacking in experience and knowledge it's okay, but when you argue or debate against something like me you should fully expect to be doing it on multiple adpating levels and you should have enough sense and understanding to see WHERE those arguments evolve, HOW they evolved, and WHAT they evolved from. If you can't do that, just don't bother, cause I'm not interested in kickin it with teh high school debate team, I'm interested in a highly complex debate made up of arguments within arguments that can change and adapt after every post. I am not linear, I do not think in terms of right and wrong, my postions, ideals, thoughts and opinions can change just easily as I can change my shirt. If participating in a discussion like that isn't something you can handle, I would suggest you find another thread.
Anyway, since you're now arguing about the effect of time on the quality perceived in an artwork, you should probably shift the thread to 'General Off-Topic.' This forum is for the discussion of amvs.
In your first posts, the reason many people started 'arguing' with you to begin with, you said that when it comes to amvs, only those which took a long time to make are good. You weren't talking about the 'test of time' when you wrote that. The people arguing with you weren't talking about the 'test of time.' The problem here is that people are arguing with something you - as you noted - have already left behind.
You're now talking about another topic, and that is fine. But it seems many of the people arguing with you are only doing it because of your first statements. Address those statements and the discussion can have a conclusion. Keep shifting the argument to different fields and genres and it never ends - the lack of definitive end you mentioned to Savia. And again, that's fine. But make sure your oppponents know what you're arguing before you go on and on and on talking to yourself and changing your 'topic' so you never have to address points.
I brought up the problem with quality versus time and what did you do? You said the topic wasn't about that - it was about the 'test of time' and whether or not perceived quality survives that test. In which case, I have no argument with you.
Now, if you want to talk about your original statement - the one that so many people disagreed with, I'd love to discuss that. But as long as you shift the topic every time someone replies, there's no point in it.