http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_manYou're engaging in more straw mans. It's very easy to beat an opponent's argument when you ignore their argument, make a new one up and rip it apart. It doesn't change what I said before and you have ignored and strawed man it twice in a row.
As well you keep engaging in an Ad nauseam, which is not proof of your assertion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_nauseamMy reputation? Couldn't be much worse than yours. Classification of being a troll is an individual determination (you are troll to some but not to others) and you have been considered a troll too before, as have I, but you are the code monkey who slops out the crap code.
No more ad nauseam fallacies. You made your bed and go lie in it. The market speaks for Jinn. Anyway going away from the computer momentarily, keep engaging in those ad nauseams.
So you keep evading the discussion about the bet. I (and the others) got you. Intensive quoting of Wikipedia articles doesn't add credibility to your posts.
I have no problem with a bet as long as long as it is the original argument I made and not one of your imaginary straw mans. Most pertinent here: You made a twitter post about Jinn making multiplayer
possible in Bethesda games (which includes all their titles) when the concept and working code for it predates BTC and goes back a decade. How much do you want to bet? I'll leave a BTC address on here and wouldn't even need to read your posts. I already linked one file, which was originally uploaded in 2011 and edited last in 2013, that had multiplayer in Skyrim. There was similar and older mods for Oblivion and Morrowind.
The beauty of Greek Logos is that if your opponent is making formal fallacies you do not need acknowledge or follow through with them. That is evading the discussion (you make an ad nauseam fallacy and the other person leaves: doesn't mean you won - it is actually a proof by assertion fallacy - just means you're a fool who likes the sound of their own voice and the more reasoned intelligent person left).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_nauseamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertionCfB continues to engage in ad nauseams and straw mans and proof of assertions. I'm making a statement here: CfB cannot even form a single sound argument and that should speak for itself.