Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 
Send Topic Print
Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen (Read 39082 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #165 - Apr 17th, 2012 at 6:07pm
 
pjb05 wrote on Apr 17th, 2012 at 5:55pm:
freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2012 at 5:51pm:
Is there a contradiction in saying that there is a reasonable case for giving priority to shore based spots and then saying there is not?

What arguments do you consider reasonable when it comes to giving priority to certain spots?


I didn't say anything about giving priority to certain spots, you back to your false dichotomy again. Remember our point of difference is actually about the benefit of marine parks.


Quote:
Should land based spots take priority over spots that can only be accessed by boat?

You can make a reasonable case for that.


It is not a false dichotomy PJ. It is a very real choice. Are you suggesting that marine parks are imaginary? Or perhaps you think legislators should ignore the direct interests of fishermen in choosing locations? Isn't it you that whines all the time about people's favourite fishing spots being locked up? Yet here you are claiming the decision is imaginary and that you are incapable of suggesting which spots should have priority (then contradicting yourself of course).
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #166 - Apr 17th, 2012 at 6:14pm
 
freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2012 at 6:07pm:
pjb05 wrote on Apr 17th, 2012 at 5:55pm:
freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2012 at 5:51pm:
Is there a contradiction in saying that there is a reasonable case for giving priority to shore based spots and then saying there is not?

What arguments do you consider reasonable when it comes to giving priority to certain spots?


I didn't say anything about giving priority to certain spots, you back to your false dichotomy again. Remember our point of difference is actually about the benefit of marine parks.


Quote:
Should land based spots take priority over spots that can only be accessed by boat?

You can make a reasonable case for that.


It is not a false dichotomy PJ. It is a very real choice. Are you suggesting that marine parks are imaginary? Or perhaps you think legislators should ignore the direct interests of fishermen in choosing locations? Isn't it you that whines all the time about people's favourite fishing spots being locked up? Yet here you are claiming the decision is imaginary and that you are incapable of suggesting which spots should have priority (then contradicting yourself of course).


I see you are still chopping my quote in half again - you absolute moron.

You are also saying that the only choice about marine parks is where the NTZ's are placed - that's rather Leninistic.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 17th, 2012 at 6:28pm by pjb05 »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #167 - Apr 17th, 2012 at 6:39pm
 
Quote:
I see you are still chopping my quote in half again - you absolute moron


You are yet to explain how it alters the meaning. In fact you claimed that the second bit did not contradict the first bit.

Can you explain how I am creating a dichotomy?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #168 - Apr 18th, 2012 at 5:52pm
 
334651954] Quote:
I see you are still chopping my quote in half again - you absolute moron


You are yet to explain how it alters the meaning. In fact you claimed that the second bit did not contradict the first bit.

Really, then explain how you you can claim that I favour prioritising land based spots over boat based ones when I said the reverse in the next sentence. Don't you think that changes the complxion a wee bit? You have also missed the point that I was speaking in the third person.

Can you explain how I am creating a dichotomy?

Are you really that thick? I have been over this before.

PS: It's called a false dichotomy.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #169 - Apr 18th, 2012 at 6:19pm
 
Quote:
Really, then explain how you you can claim that I favour prioritising land based spots


Quote me. I guess I was right that you simply did not understand the question.

Quote:
Are you really that thick? I have been over this before


You failed then and you are failing now. I assumed when you simply moved on to a different but equally stupid accusation (as is your style) that this had sunk in, but obviously not. You apparently have no clue at all what false dichotomy means. If you try to use big words that you don't understand it will always backfire on you.

Quote:
PS: It's called a false dichotomy.


Tell me PJ, do you think that a false dichotomy involves a dichotomy? Do you think you can have a false dichotomy without a dichotomy? Or do little details like this not matter so long as the feeling behind what you post is right?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #170 - Apr 18th, 2012 at 6:33pm
 
Go away and grow a brain, FD.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #171 - Apr 18th, 2012 at 6:36pm
 
Grin
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #172 - Apr 19th, 2012 at 8:14am
 
Come on PJ, tell us what a dichotomy is.

And tell us all that you see no contradiction between these two posts and you are not afraid of your own opinion:

pjb05 wrote on Mar 18th, 2012 at 10:30am:
Should land based spots take priority over spots that can only be accessed by boat?

You can make a reasonable case for that.


pjb05 wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 8:10pm:
freediver wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 8:04pm:
Can a reasonable argument be made in favour of giving priority to shore based fishing spots?

No.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #173 - Apr 19th, 2012 at 4:45pm
 
I see you still haven't grown a brain yet. Don't you realise how scurilous it is to chop someone's wuote in half to change it's meaning? Don'y you know there is a difference between saying something in the third person and saying it directly?

What does it say about your policy when you resort to these pathetic ruses while ignoring my sustantive points?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #174 - Apr 19th, 2012 at 5:46pm
 
I did not change it's meaning PJ. You even claimed yourself that the other bit did not contradict it.

Which bit was meant to be in third person?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #175 - Apr 22nd, 2012 at 11:16am
 
[link=1330690120/174#174 date=1334821576]I did not change it's meaning PJ. You even claimed yourself that the other bit did not contradict it.

Then why do you insist on chopping it in half every time. Now your following that misquote with another misquote.

Which bit was meant to be in third person? [/quote]

Duh, the bit you keep chopping in half.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #176 - Apr 22nd, 2012 at 6:35pm
 
I quoted the relevant bit PJ. I did not alter the meaning in any way.

Do these two posts contradict each other?

pjb05 wrote on Mar 18th, 2012 at 10:30am:
Should land based spots take priority over spots that can only be accessed by boat?

You can make a reasonable case for that.


pjb05 wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 8:10pm:
freediver wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 8:04pm:
Can a reasonable argument be made in favour of giving priority to shore based fishing spots?

No.


Have you figured out what a dichotomy is yet?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Marine Parks mean simpler rules for fishermen
Reply #177 - Apr 22nd, 2012 at 6:48pm
 
Still haven't grown a brain yet FD? Your still chopping the quote in half. Not to mention you have ignored nearly all the points I put up saying what's wrong with your policy.

PS: The term is a false dichotomy. If you don't understand it look it up on wiki or similar.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 
Send Topic Print