Genjitsushugi Yuusha no Oukoku Saikenki - Vol. 3 Ch. 15 - The Story of a Certain Adventurer

[boag]

@shouldsleep
What you "think" I said, is not what I said, thats your issue not mine, and the fact that you need to twist my argument to fit yours is a pretty damn salacious move, aka a dickweed move.

@Dj0rel
Im not going to stop criticinzing the series just because you say so, i would ask you to point out the BS, but you already shown you have no basis of counter argument.

 

[shouldsleep]

@boag You basically said x is bad because it is not realistic and then replied thay y handled it better than x. Following any train of thought, You'll assume that y being better than x is in relation to the fact that you said that x is not realistic. It's not twisting anything, particularly since you added no new info apart from declaring y is better than x.

You can't say I hate oranges because it's not sour enough then follow through by saying I like lemons better and assume that everybody means that you're referring to its colour. That's basically what you did.

 

[boag]

@shouldsleep
No, ive stated several issues i have with this series, one of which is putting realist on the title, and then doing a shitty job of interpreting it.
Another argument I made for a specific event in the series was the catching of the corrupt politicians, In which I stated, that Soudouki did it better.
Now you can try and fit the argument however you fucking want, but you can fuck off for putting up an argument i didnt make because you cant read properly.

 

[shouldsleep]

@boag And what would be your metric for Soudouki for doing it better? The fact in itself is you didn't provide any new why x does it better, so the assumption would be that your original statement is your basis is what people will assume.

Calling people out for not reading properly would be your fault since, on any sensible discourse, the fault of improperly explaining lies on the writer, not the reader.

PS. I like the fact that you're also basically not answering anything that counters your preconceived notions (the food issue, why the duke did what he did, "having less transmitters vs receivers")

 

[boag]

@shouldsleep

would be your metric for Soudouki for doing it better?

Better characters, better progression, better comedy, better action, a coherent plot.

Its your fault I dont know how to read

No its not.

you didnt counter anything

You really do have reading comprehension issues dont you?

 

[shouldsleep]

Oh man, this is gold

@boag

Better characters, better progression, better comedy, better action, a coherent plot

This would have been the proper response a few replies ago. this is the first time you actually used a new metric, and not randomly assumed people would know whatever goes into your mind is instantly transferred to text. Sadly, not enough.

First and second one is subjective, provide more context to this because they're as unsubstantial as, say, me saying that Uranus is a better planet than Jupiter.
3 isn't even a proper argument, as this manga never even attempted to be comedic (it tries endearing with Musashibo and stuff, but doesn't pull the funny card). You can complain about the lack of horror from, say SoL because SoL A has it but B does not, but that's just false analogy.

Again, 4 is insubstantial without a better metric.

Its your fault I dont know how to read
No its not.

Sigh. You've never touched a proper debate before didn't you? See here, any sensible argument requires you to provide basis before providing examples. Now the only substantial basis you've actually provided is that this series is unrealistic, while one example you've provided, to quote your words, is this:

there are several Isekais that have done the purge of corrupt politicians and out of the top of my head Isekai Tensei Soudouji did it in a pretty clever way.

From your post, you only mentioned that Soudouki did it in a clever way, but that in itself lacks any substantial rationale argument. It did it "cleverly how" would be the example, sans any metric provided, your original thought would hold. This is how any debate works.

you didnt counter anything

The only thing you attempted to realistically argue about is the food shortage complaint, where your response is

Also the ruined Kingdom was ruined because of terrible desicions, and it never shows to be a complete shithole.
We dont have food, but theres TV for everyone, its contrived and it just shows the author is doing it to jerk himself off to how "SMART" he is.

This was already rebutted some posts ago, which, unless you can refute, would assume that the answer behind it is sound.

The "why less transmitters vs receivers" is a poor argument in the first place, since it holds true in real life. You don't see the same amount of TVs vs TV stations do you?

The fact that the Beast Duke still chooses to go on this retarded civil war, when he actually knows the impending threat of war with another nation

Again, all answered storywise. If you looked at the spoilers, you'll find that his actions are passable (may not be the best option, but that rarely happens in almost everything), so this complaint is already answered, unless you find fault despite the added knowledge.



Also, going full blown ad hominem? Notice that I never attacked you, simply your delivery or your points itself. Shocking, I know, but some people can be civilized even on the net.

PS. I'd also mention that I've never pointed an opinion of my own, merely counterpoints to yours (that's what counterarguments should be, not random attacks).

 

[boag]

@shouldsleep
Im just going to grab the most idiotic thing in your reponse, because replying to each of your points seems to be as effective as painting a wall with a stencil brush.

You don't see the same amount of TVs vs TV stations do you?

The reason we dont have that many TV stations in RL is because goverments regulate the wavelenghts, not because of a lack of transmitters.
This is a prime example of you jumping through hoops and then landing face flat becaue you dont understand how the real world works, or how contrived everything in this story is by comparison.

 

[shouldsleep]

@boag
That's not the the only reason. Making and regulating a station is more costly than watching one is a reason, for one. Then there's getting sponsors, staff, creating shows. The list is long.

And to rub it in your face how stupid your argument was, see I made the statement to hinge on your viewpoint that

"1 transmitter to a bunch of receivers is an asspull

Which, by your logic by the way, makes real life an asspull.

Again. Do note that I never alluded to any "the government is regulating the wavelengths" thought in my arguments. I only noted that your "unrealistic" issue holds as much value in real life, (Ie there are indeed more TVs vs TV stations, unless you're living in a different unvierse) making claiming its stupidity in the first place ridiculous.

PS. The real world whatever analogy you're making isn't really giving you any points. For instance, government regulation, for a lot of things, is true, of course, but that's not the thing stopping most people (similarly why you see people subscribing to whatever -internet, electricity, instead of making their own). Money is a thing, and lots of thing cost tons of money (oh and guess what the mc is?). As much as you claim you understand how the real world works, your statements definitely don't show such awareness.

 

[boag]

@shouldsleep
You can make a TV transceiver with 50 bucks worth of electronics
https://youtu.be/yOtdSkDE4nE

Thanks for proving again how dumb you are.
make sure your next reply cant be debunked with a 3 second google search.

 

[Dj0rel]

@boag
If you had watched the damn video you linked, you would have saw that the guy never shows us the device working and only claims to have tested it inside his house. So much for the 50 bucks TV transceiver.

Also the fact that you pretty much need to resort to personal attacks proves beyond any reasonable doubt that you have no valid arguments whatsoever.

 

[boag]

@Dj0rel

I have no idea how transmitters work or how they even look like, so if i dont see it working then it doesnt work, haha

https://youtu.be/en2oyWehNkU

 

[shouldsleep]

@boag You're clearly digging yourself a deeper hole for yourself to complain out of

1. Before watching any of your links, I already knew there would be a huge problem with the range. See, unlike you, I do not need to use google search before knowing how the concept behind radio transmission works. Oh and surprise surprise, first video has a range of 10 meters, and second one has a 50 meter range. Not so useful for a target audience of a whole country. Next time try to check your replies before using them as counter-claims

2. There's a great logistics cost behind TV stations. This is one of the main barriers why there are so few of them. The series answers this because the kingdom shoulders all the cost. Then there's also the fact that you have to make shows that has a wide reach of interest. Japan has 4 of these types: singing/dance shows, game/trivia shows, news and sports. The barrier for game shows is that the public should have a certain base level of mundane knowledge, which is hard to attain in a pseudo middle age environment. News, they already cover, and sports requires knowledge of the rules as well as competitive teams. The idol shows simply has the least cost behind them, making it easiest to implement.

But that's not really important because
3. Again let me reiterate. My argument is that there are more TVs than TV station. Now I do not know whatever logic sprouted in your mind that implied that this has certain connotations in mind, but that is basically the whole argument. Unless you can prove that this statement is false, whatever counters you claim (even if they're wrong) is irrelevant.

See here this is how it goes:
A. You: claim that having more receivers vs transmitters is stupid
B. Me: No. It holds true in real life
C. You: whatever nonsense

See here, unless you can counter point B, whatever statements you use are fallacies of irrelevant conclusion


Again with the ad hominem. Why do people think that they can win an argument by calling other people stupid? I never called you stupid (I have, at least, a base principle in actually engaging logically), I called your statements stupid and gave the reason why they are.

 

[boag]

@shouldsleep
OMG, you cannot be this dumb.
i posted that to show you how easily available TV transmitters are, the most basic POS transmitter can be built with 50 bucks worht of electronics.
We can just as easily make a transmitter as we can make a receiver.

We dont do it because there are goverment regulations and building a more power transmitter usually gets you jail time for pirate TV since goverments own the wavelenghts.
Your dumbass cant process the argument so you go on a tangent.

The whole fact that he isnt using a 2 way communication with Important people and militarty is asasinine.
Even if it wasnt visual transmision just carrying audio over is a revolutionizing idea, which changed our world in the early 20th century.

But oyu cant process it, youre too focused on defending this garbage as "SMART", and I can see now why you are so amazed by this work, you have no idea how one of the most basic everyday pieces of technology work.

please just stop embarrasing yourself with ignorant replies.

 

[shouldsleep]

@boag Did you even look at what you posted? The author of the video said that the reach is 50 meters. There's a big difference between 50 meters and being accessible to the whole country. Making something accessible to the whole country requires a lot more money.

Government owning the wavelengths(which by the way, they do not, it's called regulating) is country dependent, and even if it was universal, the money barrier is still a big thing.
And ultimately, it still does not refute the original statement :

There are more TVs than TV stations. (Even if you replace that with television transmitters vs receivers, it still holds true by the way)

This too

We can just as easily make a transmitter as we can make a receiver.

Yeah, don't even start there, unless somehow, you actually have the knowhow to make a TV? There's a huge difference between making something and setting up something.

He did use 2 way communication with the 3 dukes. Did you even read the chapter? I already answered why doing a 2 way transmission all the time is not feasible.

I never said the series was "SMART". See, I'm actually using logic, unlike you, and logic dictates that you don't counter argument using appeal to emotion. You provide statements, I refute them. Simple as that. Something that either you can't do or deliberately don't do. Certainly isn't doing you any favour, by the way.

Also go into a tangent? What? I'm not the one who suddenly inserts new points into this thing, if you look at it:
You: statement
Me: Counter
You: Ignore everything, say Soudouki is better. (1)
Me: Uh, you used realism as a standard. Soudouki is far from realistic
You: You don't know how to read (2)
Me: That's not how arguments work
You: Placed the metrics that should have been put earlier
Me: Those are subjective, one is false analogy. Also I like the fact that you're not countering any of my counterpoint
You: Ignores everything only to cherry pick an argument that you think you can go to and goes into a tangent why there are less TV stations than TVs (3)
Me: Your reasoning is not the whole picture. Also your post is irrelevant.
You: repeat the same statement (why) and claim that I'm going on a tangent
Me: this post

And so, going off tangent here, this is what going off tangent means:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/go-off-on-a-tangent

To repeat what I said earlier: I'm refuting your statements using proper counter arguments. Meaning I don't insert new metrics, but simply, show that yours is flawed. Proper arguments leave no room to go off tangent. I mentioned it earlier to show that who you're arguing with actually has some proper debate knowledge and etiquette(and to point out your points that aren't even proper arguments). Now you adding whatever connotations is what is going off tangent. There's a difference between going off tangent and being wordy, though admittedly, I might have been liberal with the number of times I called out your ad hominem statements, which, you are doing again.

 

[Dj0rel]

@boag

Once again, you are resorting to personal attacks which proves beyond any reasonable doubt that you have no valid arguments whatsoever.

 

[boag]

@shouldsleep
Its not about reach, its about availability, you cant seem to grasp this simple concept.
Just like you cant grasp goverment ownership, you cannot use the any of the air frequencies just like you cannot stake a claim to maritime territories.

There are more tvs than tv stations

again an argument I didnt make and that you keep trying to force, AKA going a damn tangent, beating around the bush.

I already answered why doing a 2 way transmission all the time is not feasible.

Yes, because plot contrivance, what a solid argument.

proper debate knowledge

youre severely lacking when dont research your response, present strawmans and move goalposts when you cant defend the foundations of your argument.

@Dj0rel
You dont have a proper response to anything besides besides being a cheerleader, either bring up something useful to the debate, or kindly watch from the sidelines.

 

[ConBruh]

I just want to say that this was the most autistic argument I have ever seen. First of all, Boag you are extremely arrogant and can't handle a point of yours being refuted. The second you guys tried to compare transmitters in our world to magic devices in their world should've been a red flag that you're spewing nonsense.

Then there's the fact that you both only know how to attack each other, and forget what you're arguing about in the first place. Case in point, you both started to attack each other until you delved into some tangent of how transmitters work as if it's relevant at all. Please keep your pointless armchair theories to yourself.

 

[acar]

@ConBruh just ignore him dude he just random guy who hating series by saying he just "criticizing", he doesnt even care about your point of the counter-argument that people give, and he think by insulting people with "dumb" or whatev it is makes him looks smart.

 

[gmans000]

 

[StarGasm]

Awww, Yuno is such a nice girl