Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Don't philosophers answer questions?

Definitely lock time. Let the readers decide.

I am sure people will see that I was the only one working logically step by step and justifying my argument with rules.

JinkDragon hit the nail on the head that most of you work from a Fundamental Concept that isn't in the rules. It's fine if you all want to add the Fundamental Concept but that's a house rule and should be clearly marked as such.

And also JinkDragon's post above only augmented my argument. Everything he pointed out was solid except for the black hole bit, since the black hole bit only comes from reading into the rules.

Then why fear answering a question?
A strong argument can withstand any questioning, even absurd ones.
I'd still like to hear your answer. Its not too late...

col_impact wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
That would violate the tenets of this site, as the topic is clearly being discussed in a many page thread that is still on the front page.

Again:
If we do not use a Flight Mode, have we used only the Gliding Flight mode?

I only answer serious questions. You are not being serious. Discussing absurdly literal reads is pointless and you are just being disruptive.

So back up, throw out the absurd silly stuff and get back to the real debate.

You have yet to answer any serious questions. You have deliberately ignored them in fact. Your making up rules as you go at this point and then changing your argument when each one is proven wrong. Jinx just showed your latest one to be wrong. What is your next theory??

 grendel083 wrote:
Then why fear answering a question?
A strong argument can withstand any questioning, even absurd ones.
I'd still like to hear your answer. Its not too late...

If he frames the question in such a way that the Flyrant can't shoot or manifest psychic powers then its not a serious question.

So no answer?
The debate cannot continue.

col_impact wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
Then why fear answering a question?
A strong argument can withstand any questioning, even absurd ones.
I'd still like to hear your answer. Its not too late...

If he frames the question in such a way that the Flyrant can't shoot or manifest psychic powers then its not a serious question.

No more silly than your post that a Flyrant can both Glide and Swoop in the same turn and not break any rules.

 grendel083 wrote:
So no answer?
The debate cannot continue.

Are you proposing that the Flyrant can take no action except use its Gliding Flight Mode? No shooting? No pychic powers?

col_impact wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
So no answer?
The debate cannot continue.

Are you proposing that the Flyrant can take no action except use its Gliding Flight Mode. No shooting? No pychic powers?

Why do you answer questions with absurd questions?

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
So no answer?
The debate cannot continue.

Are you proposing that the Flyrant can take no action except use its Gliding Flight Mode. No shooting? No pychic powers?

Why do you answer questions with absurd questions?

Because those questions are the consequences of how he frames the question. I don't need to answer questions that have absurd repercussions and are not indeed serious questions with a serious proposal behind them.

col_impact wrote:

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
So no answer?
The debate cannot continue.

Are you proposing that the Flyrant can take no action except use its Gliding Flight Mode. No shooting? No pychic powers?

Why do you answer questions with absurd questions?

Because those questions are the consequences of how he frames the question. I don't need to answer questions that have absurd repercussions and are not indeed serious questions with a serious proposal behind them.

You have not answered any questions in this thread by numerous questioners. You have failed to put together any logical argument.

SO, since it seems that nobody is actually interested in futher discussion on the actual topic, we seem to be done here.