You have to either accept that your point was wrong and integrate that acceptance into your line of argument or argue for your point being correct - This is done by either supplying sufficient empirical data that helps create some synthesis with the rest of the data or you go through the given data and explain why it is faulty or insufficient as a basis for a rebuttal.

As the rest of the comment you are responding to explains, you have still yet to do this.

Nah. It can't be popular enough to work here. If it could, you would have said how. You're just diverting from that fact because you don't actually have an answer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

Lmk when you want to actually make progress on anything regarding this topic and not just nitpick tediously. The main point is that there's no way to get those political systems to fly here because people don't want them currently.

[–] BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

this is condescending

Correct, you are behaving poorly so I am treating you in kind

Distracting from the main point

The only one distracting from anything is you. You are the one who seeks discussion and then flees at challenge, I am holding you to it.

You are now attempting to give yourself a plausible exit where you can save face, which is very funny since the only audience is you and me, yet your ego can still not handle it. Sadly the exit-strategy you've sought is ill-fitting, since both you and I are aware that you are the one who has been avoiding discussion, instead seeking to change the subject at every turn. It is no surprise that you would do something like this, you seem to be a fucking idiot.
I still hold out hope you will be able to do the bare minimum, but I cannot be disappointed by you anymore.