Shadow tv editz

‪@idkk.shadow‬ ‪@Clix_Editzz‬ my account got limited 😢😢😢😢

4 days ago | [YT] | 0

Shadow tv editz

‪@ZxH4x_ed1tz‬

5 days ago | [YT] | 0

Shadow tv editz

Holy shit even ‪@randomguyfromneptun937‬ is smarter then this share ts to qeq even qeq knows what a fallacy is

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3

3 weeks ago | [YT] | 0

Shadow tv editz

‪@randomguyfromneptun937‬ are you retarded or what you just said I can’t decide when I win so I got head plant as a judge but now you can decide when you win? Wrap it up bro you lost

3 months ago | [YT] | 2

Shadow tv editz

‪@randomguyfromneptun937‬ Yes, saying “fix ur grammar” in a debate that is not about grammar is generally considered a red herring because it distracts from the main topic and shifts the focus to something irrelevant to the actual argument.
What is a Red Herring?
A red herring is a rhetorical or logical distraction used to divert attention away from the main point or relevant question in a discussion or debate. Bringing up unrelated issues, like grammar in a debate not about language, fits this definition.
Why Grammar Policing Can Be a Red Herring
• Commenting on someone’s grammar in the middle of a substantive debate shifts attention away from the central argument and attacks a side issue instead.
• This tactic does not address the actual content or logic of the opponent’s argument, but instead diverts the discussion to superficial mistakes.
• Just like tone policing (focusing on how something is said rather than what is said), grammar policing is a distraction from the matter at hand and serves the purpose of derailing the original topic.
Is This Always a Red Herring?
• If the debate topic is specifically about grammar, language, or writing standards, then mentioning grammar errors is relevant and not a red herring.
• In other contexts, like politics, philosophy, or science debates, grammar comments are almost always distractions and qualify as red herrings.
Related Logical Fallacies
• This approach can also overlap with the ad hominem fallacy, as it implicitly attacks a person’s ability rather than engaging with their argument.
In summary, bringing up grammar in an unrelated debate is a classic example of a red herring, as it derails the conversation and avoids engaging with the actual issue. So this means you made red herring by that one word

3 months ago | [YT] | 1

Shadow tv editz

‪@randomguyfromneptun937‬ I only found 2 because. Weirdov keeps on making post

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 months ago | [YT] | 1

Shadow tv editz

‪@idkk.shadow‬ can you be a judge and if not I will just ask ‪@Weirdov-uo3‬

3 months ago | [YT] | 0

Shadow tv editz

‪@randomguyfromneptun937‬ there got what you wanted?

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 months ago | [YT] | 0

Shadow tv editz

‪@UTTVM-POLY-EDITS‬ you can take this pfp I made

3 months ago | [YT] | 2

Shadow tv editz

‪@UTTVM-POLY-EDITS‬ tell me how this isn’t ap the ap on titan speaker mans blasters wasn’t even able to put up a scratch as he blasted all of those blasts now when we look at fake g man using his lasers on titan speaker man cc blasters they are cleary making ap because if that was dc that would make big explosionsAP (Attack Potency) and DC (Destructive Capacity) are related concepts but are not exactly the same thing. Attack Potency (AP) refers to the amount of damage an attack can inflict—essentially, how strong an attack is when it hits a target. Destructive Capacity (DC) measures how much area, mass, or environment an attack can destroy with its effect.
An attack can have high AP by being able to harm very durable targets, yet might not have high DC if it only damages a small area. Conversely, an attack might have high DC (destroying a large area) but not necessarily have high AP if it cannot harm highly durable targets. Therefore, AP does not always equal DC—they can differ depending on the nature and focus of the attack.Destructive Capacity (DC) does not always equal Attack Potency (AP). While both are measures of an attack’s effectiveness, AP refers to the energy or force behind an attack (how much it can harm a target), whereas DC refers to the amount of physical destruction the attack causes in its environment. An attack may have high AP (able to harm durable targets) but cause limited destruction (low DC), or it may have widespread environmental destruction (high DC) but not be effective against durable opponents (lower AP). Thus, DC and AP can be different, depending on how the attack is delivered and its effects.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4

3 months ago | [YT] | 2