Cris offers the wager to Paul

[Knockwurst]

Curtains, you may be able to play tournament chess, but you can't play speed chess worth a lick. Patzer! Patzer! (Chanted to the tune of Da-rryl). I challenge you to best of ten blitz games foe my entire PLO bankroll at Washington Square Park 5:00 am tomorrow morning. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

-- Hey, Chris get off my f*cking computer!

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
she has clearly shown she doesn't care what people think about her.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly.

[ QUOTE ]
I can't believe I'm the only sees that it's a rather reasonable belief to have.

[/ QUOTE ]

THIS is the thread that compelled you to post for the first time ever, and in support of the child rape analogist? You are a real piece of work. Now that you're posting there are some other deranged people who could use your defense. Go to town.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll also mention the fact that she has not resorted to the smear tactics and insults that all of you have used on her.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, we could see how amazingly far she is above using smear tactics, right about when she launched into the bit about me raping her daughter.

Here are a couple of the insults to which she has not resorted:

"a typically immature, pseudo-sophisticated young male"

and more recently, in this very thread,

"You are, quite simply, a fool."

You mind if I repurpose that last one as-is? Thanks.

[CrisBrown]

Sephus,

[ QUOTE ]
there are characteristics common to many rapists that paul obviously does not possess.

[/ QUOTE ]

List them, oh learned sage.

Cris

[CrisBrown]

Hi Knockwurst,

I did appellate law. All of my clients had already been convicted of serious charges. The issue at bar in that particular case was a technical detail of sentencing, not his guilt or innocence.

Cris

[ohgeetee]

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't matter matter which is more likely. Paul's assertion that he wouldn't trust her not to cheat is the same as her assertion that she wouldn't trust him not to rape her daughter: both are probably not very likely, but in each case, it's not work the risk.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely wrong. It certainly does matter which is more likely. Using such an extreme case of hyperbole to try to argue with a completely logical point simply discredits the person using it, and invalidates their entire argument.

You also say that both cheating and her daughter raped are not very likely, offering no distinction between the likliness. Are you inferring, as Cris explicitly has, that there is an equal chance that you will encounter cheating on scrabble online vs a 12 year old girl being raped? This is absurd.

This thread is simply amazing.

[Knockwurst]

Yep, that's about the only way a novice criminal defense attorney could represent a "serial rapist." Though where I practice appellate attorneys rarely actually meet their clients in person while representing them in that capacity.

[CrisBrown]

ohgeetee,

[ QUOTE ]
You also say that both cheating and her daughter raped are not very likely, offering no distinction between the likliness. Are you inferring, as Cris explicitly has, that there is an equal chance that you will encounter cheating on scrabble online vs a 12 year old girl being raped? This is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

What would you estimate the odds that, in an online Scrabble game, one player or the other is cheating?

One in five girls in the U.S. will be sexually assaulted before her 18th birthday. It's a fact. Look it up.

Cris

[Avatar of Wine]

[ QUOTE ]
You know, I have visited these forums for over a year, and I have never felt the need to make a post. Until now.

It is amazing how Cris has managed to come up with a rational argument for every point that she has brought up, and yet the only thing you have done in response, Paul, is ridicule her. You began by denouncing the possibility that she was only a 3:1 dog to you at scrabble, despite you not knowing anything about her ability. You even admitted at one point that she could have been using double-reverse psychology, but for some reason you were certain that she was just "saving face," even though she has clearly shown she doesn't care what people think about her.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK - see, the thing is that this entire conversation took place in that wonderful realm we refer to as the "hypothetical" - surely, as a trial defense lawyer, Cris is familar w/ this, as her JOB was to CREATE THESE SCENARIOS to rebut probable cause.

I know this, b/c if she had worked for a better firm, they would have hired my firm to help her research, study, and create these scenarios.

[ QUOTE ]
It's appalling how quickly and ignorantly people react to an extreme comment, like the one she made about rape, without understanding the logic behind it. I can't believe I'm the only sees that it's a rather reasonable belief to have. How many of you would trust a stranger not to rape your child? I certainly wouldn't. It doesn't matter matter which is more likely. Paul's assertion that he wouldn't trust her not to cheat is the same as her assertion that she wouldn't trust him not to rape her daughter: both are probably not very likely, but in each case, it's not work the risk.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, Cris wants to point out the slightest case of strawmanning by Paul, but now we've walked into a severe case of fallacious logic, one that can't be cured by our normal, rational antibiotics. First comes the fallacy of degree, in which her example is severely different from Paul's, making it a False Analogy.

Cris, you're good at this particular fallacy - probably served you well in court, actually, so kudos on that. There is a far different underlying psychological element to rape, and you should know this - perhaps we don't all do psychological/communications research for a living, but it's a substantial part of high-end criminal law, so you should at least be familiar with it.

Simply put: if the average person is put in a situation where it is possible to cheat, then is put in a situation where it is possible to rape, there is NOT the same possibility of each happening. One requires a strong pathology for control, a perversion of reality in that way, while the other is simply using resources in a dishonest way.

Now, who is strawmanning, again?

Attacking Paul's lack of desire to play, when the conversation was NOT ABOUT THAT AT ALL, is the straw man, simply put.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll also mention the fact that she has not resorted to the smear tactics and insults that all of you have used on her.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alex, that's simply not the case - her use of rape, a strong evocative image where connotation is far stronger than denotation, is a sort of 'damning by example' - very weak, and certainly it was not done accidently.

Cris - I applaud you for sacking up for the challenge, but let it die already. Also, if you're still following the system you claim in the link, we need to play.

-RC
--.. and this is this lurker's second post, Alex. Sorry bud.

[daveymck]

I am going to have to look therough the threads to see the start of this fued.

What seems to have started as a semi light hearted scrabble challange has degenerated into one of the worst threads on here.

Could you not have thought up a better analogy than child rape for gods sake, somthing like trusting him with a freshly baked cake or somthing similar.

As I understand it most child abuse is actually perpertrated by those that the children know and trust and in the main family members.

By the same regard do you trust your husband 100%, should I be trusted around my five year old daughter and seven year old stepdaughter, or with my nieces, by your reckoning I have the "capability" to rape or abuse them.

I assume you lock your daughter away cos what about male doctors, or teachers, or the local shopkeeper, she is safe nowhere (by your reckoning anyway).

At 12 I would be more worried about her getting a older boyfriend, smoking, drinking and drugs than some random stanger attacking her. And in all of these cases I would be more interested in education than scaremongering and encouraging paranoia, dont let the unsavory characters you met in your work discolour the normal people in the world.

Its this sort of attitude that is becoming prevelant in the world you cant even take photos of your kids in the local pool as people accuse you of all sorts, its madness.

[CrisBrown]

Hi Knockwurst,

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, that's about the only way a novice criminal defense attorney could represent a "serial rapist." Though where I practice appellate attorneys rarely actually meet their clients in person while representing them in that capacity.

[/ QUOTE ]

The case went to a hearing, and thus he was entitled to be there. In Florida, many such issues are handled not with the standard appeal -- which has probably already lapsed -- but with a post-conviction motion which is functionaly similar to a writ of habeus corpus.

Cris