From: Greegor on
KBW > I am of the opinion that Linda is mentally ill.
KBW > This opinion formed due to the posts I've
KBW > read from her on Usenet. I do need to
KBW > point out she could be acting.  I can't think
KBW > of any reason for her to do so, but
KBW > everything she's posting could be nothing
KBW > more than an act.

G > Considering your folks had to set up your
G > inheritance through a protective or
G > "spendthrift" trust because they knew you
G > were stupid enough to blow it buying
G > magic beans,  what weight do you think
G > your determination would carry, Kent?

KBW > Considering you've already admitted
KBW > my parents did no such thing,
KBW > what do you think your LIE will
KBW > accomplish? Please be specific.

Kent Wills stock deception G 1
False claim that I conceded something
convenient for Kent.


Kent's stock deceptions/logical fallacies (7/28/2010)

F. Ad Hominem calling opponents
1. Drunks or drunk drivers
2. Druggies or on drugs
3. Mentally Ill often as result of drug use
G. Res Judicata
1. Already conceded to Kent's argument
2. Question already asked and answered.
H. Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence
1a. Missing Middle, False Dilemma, False Dichotomy, bifurcation
1b. Fallacy of Complex Question - loaded question with presupposition
2. Withholding proof saying it's already on the table
3. ""Check is in the mail"" as proof of something.
4. Proof held hostage awaiting opponents proof on something else
5. Claim that a lack of proof disproves something.
6. Claim that a lack of proof proves something.
7. Claim that asking for a LINK PROVES insult XYZ
J. strawman
1. False pretense that opponent made some idiotic argument
2. Lie claimed to be based on opponents standards
K. OUTRIGHT LIE ( doesn't fit other designations )
L. IDENTITY
1. The court records were faked as a prank. ( On 3 official sites? )
2. Anonymity - That's not my name at all!
3. Doppelganger defense - " That was some OTHER Kent B Wills."
4. Never gone to prison ( convict didn't go either! mental case? )

It's as if Kent is an automation that is WAY too simple.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/loadques.html

Since a question is not an argument, simply asking a loaded question
is not a fallacious argument. Rather, loaded questions are typically
used to trick someone into implying something they did not intend. For
instance, salespeople learn to ask such loaded questions as: "Will
that be cash or charge?" This question gives only two alternatives,
thus presuming that the potential buyer has already decided to make a
purchase, which is similar to the Black-or-White Fallacy. If the
potential buyer answers the question directly, he may suddenly find
himself an actual buyer.