This all started with
"Peach is better than DK and Pit"
the general reply was "But peach has this problem, that problem..." [implying that DK and pit didnt have such problems]"
Dark.Pch ignored the subtext and blatantly stated why Peach isn't a low tier character.
The more concise reply was... "you just ignored everone's arguments... disregarded them... by saying You don't know Peach".
So someone like me comes in, and I say DK has better this that etc, and it took about a good 5 pages before Dark.Pch actually said "oh yeah, DUHH DK has better", it took a lot of work for this, because the reply always was "but Peach can do that too".
So up to that point Peach has been brought down to be lesser in two important character traits (Kill ability, zone/ranging ability), but Dark.Pch continues to assume Peach is better; by only really going by "I know Peach, you don't".
But yeah, when we FINALLY GET HIM TO AGREE on a point, he disregards it as real reason.
DK = Great Killing Power + Great Zoning + Other stuff yet to be discussed
Peach = Okay killing power + good zoning + other stuff yet to be discussed
By induction it's already showing that DK > Peach; but well...look how far this argument has gone around in circles over and over and over again because "we just doesn't know Peach" and DK's being better in main aspects of the game should be disregarded and ignored because Peach isn't "too bad" in those areas.
Dark Pch is a failure of a debater, and hence the response to him has been condescending as he continues to use a mental cap (of whatever sort) to push forward and argument that hasn't proven anything.