Of course you did not write the words house arrest. But that is what your proposed policy is: detention and confinement at home for the unvaccinated, for an indefinite period of time.
The only reason it's indefinite is vax resistance.
But that isn't the point. I was attacked for describing Toni's policy correctly.
Stop being dramatic, you weren't attacked. Your mischaracterization and strawmanning were simply pointed out.
But it was not a mischaracterisation: that's the point. There is a consistent pattern on this board from certain actors who dispute (from their perspective) any definitional anomaly.
For example, laughing dog attacked me because he did not think Toni's house arrest policy was 'indefinite' according to a second denotation of 'indefinite'. laughing dog's mindset must be on attack mode all the time. Who could think that something that fully satisfies the first definition of a word cannot be described by that word if it fails to fit some other definitions? I doubt even laughing dog thinks something like that. He was desperate to get a point against me.
And it seems he succeeded, because now you are calling my description of Toni's house arrest policy as 'indefinite' a 'straw man'.
If a word has 2 meaning, it is intellectually dishonest to deliberately omit the meaning that contradicts one's claim.
No, it is not.
How can you possibly believe this?
There are over 20 definitions for the noun version of the word 'set'. To say 'I have a toy train set' is not contradicted by another definition of 'set' as 'a clutch of eggs'. It's true I don't have a clutch of eggs. But it is not true I don't have a set.
This is primary school level stuff.
You wish to persist in your hyperbolic rhetoric in order to support your straw men claims. Pointing out straw men and false claims is not about scoring points but about maintaining an honest and fruitful discussion. It would seem you are either uninterested or incapable of that in this thread.
You are not interested in an honest discussion at all if your current response is to be believed.
It is not a false claim that Toni's house arrest policy was indefinite. It does not matter how many other definitions of 'indefinite' are produced.
It is sufficient to satisfy the primary definition.
You, of course, implicitly conceded that indeed the characterisation of 'indefinite' was apt because you did not attempt to debunk it, you looked further for a different definition which you claimed it did
not fit.
Do you feel good about your behaviour? Apart from your inner coterie of yes-men, do you think people can't see through your sad, intellectually vapid device?
"There is a consistent pattern on this board from certain actors who dispute (from their perspective) any definitional anomaly". broke every irony meter in the mulit-verse.
Sure luv. Meanwhile, will you admit you were wrong and apologise for your false claims?