I'm sorry, Prison = Severe violations of human rights since when now? Just because American prisons are like that does not mean all prisons world-wide are like that.Ummmm... so are you saying that taking away 6 months of a man's life and sending him to a place where he may suffer severe violations of human rights is equivalent to banning a character in a videogame for a period of time?
What if his stay is perfectly fine? Nothing really bad happens besides the fact that we just "ban" him for 6 months?
And that matchup was, what, 6-4? Horrible counter, I know!Don't get me wrong, I don't have a fixation on counters. Some people talk as if they play a different character for every opponent they face, when in reality it's rare that people don't just play their main. Lots of people seem to live in a fantasy world where Marth was trivialized in Melee because people just went Shiek whenever they wanted to instantly beat him.
But the problem is that I refuted that fallacious argument months ago using the exact same arguments I just used here. Thus, it's not, at all, one of the arguments on the "pro"-side with the most merit.Yuna, the point of this topic is not to advance arguments that I might not even agree with. Those are just the current state of things on the table, and I invite people to go to the Meta Knight discussion topic(s) and argue there. Your post is a prime example of a good one, because it addresses what the intelligent Pro-Ban advocates are actually saying rather than the trivial arguments that have been refuted tiem and time again.
I proved that argument flawed months ago. I just did it again. Can someone refute me or can we remove it from the OP now?The point of this thread is to bury those dead arguments which have been proven flawed, not assert that all other arguments have no flaws.
See above.Considering that I don't really feel the one he picked for the anti-ban side has much merit either...I think they're best left as examples that haven't been completely proven to be fallacies, and argued if they actually show up in a discussion about banning MK.
I also referenced Brawl. See my above post, I again referenced Brawl there. Countpicking is not all necessary. We do it because we want to. It makes things easier but are not in any way necessary. Thus, it's not at the core at all.You didn't manage to completely disprove it, you referenced Melee, other games, not "having" to counterpick, and Japan. None of that shows whether counterpicking is in reality a significant aspect of competitive Brawl in our region or not. If you can't completely disprove the point so it can be listed as one of the fallacies, then it is in fact a valid one up for debate in support of banning MK.
I was arguing against the argument as it was presented. I was not arguing against your rewritten version of it.About all I'll give you is you showed it's not the "core" of the game.
Are you saying that without significant counter-picking, Brawl has no lifespan? That counter-picking is "significant" and "necessary" in order for Brawl to even survive as a Competitive game? Because that's not at all what I was arguing against and you know it.I won't give you that it's anything less than "significant" though, and that it still matters to the longevity and overall health of competitive Brawl unless you get a far stronger point than you had against it -- so we're just arguing semantics, until you can show why it's completely irrelevent.
Present your argument and I'll argue it. But not here as it's not suitable for this thread. I was arguing against an argument presented in the OP as one of the most optimal ones for intelligent debate. I was not arguing against your revised version of it.