The Best Way to Make a Bad Name Good
Return to Board  •  Menu  •  Bottom  Page 2 of 2
Message
re: The Best Way to Make a Bad Name Good
Posted by whoisnickdoobs on 12/5 at 12:17 pm to 42
It all depends on the logo. If the logo and colors are awesome, the Pelicans name will be awesome. If the logo sucks, the name is going to suck too.

It's not a bad name though. Just a little different.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by 42 on 12/5 at 12:19 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:

making it a stupid example and thus a stupid point.


Actually, no, but I don't think you'll be satisfied with any response here.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Jumbeauxlaya on 12/5 at 12:24 pm to 42
quote:

Actually, no, but I don't think you'll be satisfied with any response here.



Actually yes, an absurd example by definition is absurd.

Damn this board is thick these days.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Fun Bunch on 12/5 at 12:25 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:

Damn this board is thick these days.



I agree. There are certain people that don't normally post here posting quite often.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Jumbeauxlaya on 12/5 at 12:28 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:

I agree. There are certain people that don't normally post here posting quite often.



oh so subtle sir, there are reasons for that.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by 42 on 12/5 at 12:28 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:

Actually yes, an absurd example by definition is absurd.

Damn this board is thick these days.



No. It's not. Twist the words how you want, but use of the absurd in making a point does make mean that point absurd. Often times, it shows the other side to be absurd, or at least that is the intent.

Perhaps he failed, but I don't think so.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Jumbeauxlaya on 12/5 at 12:32 pm to 42
quote:

No. It's not. Twist the words how you want, but use of the absurd in making a point does make mean that point absurd.


ditto. Extending an analogy to it's utmost almost always lends to an improper comparison because in the end they all have a fallacy at a certain point. There's a theory or some such in debate about that but I can never remember the name of it.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Fun Bunch on 12/5 at 12:33 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:

oh so subtle sir, there are reasons for that.






Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by 42 on 12/5 at 12:33 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:

ditto. Extending an analogy to it's utmost almost always lends to an improper comparison because in the end they all have a fallacy at a certain point. There's a theory or some such in debate about that but I can never remember the name of it.


Let me know when you know what you are talking about.

Cheers.

ETA: You may be talking about the "Causal Slippery Slope." That does not apply. And I don't think he's saying X is Y. He's saying X is like Y in some respects and is going from there.


This post was edited on 12/5 at 12:35 pm

Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Jumbeauxlaya on 12/5 at 12:36 pm to 42
It's like "extending an analogy to it's failure point" or something. psychology was a long time ago.


Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by TigerinATL on 12/5 at 12:40 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:

ditto. Extending an analogy to it's utmost almost always lends to an improper comparison because in the end they all have a fallacy at a certain point. There's a theory or some such in debate about that but I can never remember the name of it.


You are way over thinking this one. The point is people were laughing at a name we can't change, so we have to change the perception, and we won't change the outside perception if we're busy running down the name ourselves. I apologize if using extreme examples in an attempt to be obvious actually obfuscated things because it triggered some pet peeve of yours about absurd examples.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by 42 on 12/5 at 12:42 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
This isn't that. That is saying, "This team is like a horse because it pulls alot of weight with it." Then saying that because you must detach the weight from the horse to keep the horse from working itself to death, we must detach weight from the team to keep it from failing, therefore we must trade so and so.

This is saying, if something with more than 10X worth negativity can be `owned', then so can something with X negativity can. It's a direct, logical comparison, using the 10X+ bit of information to prove the point in one fell swoop.



Reply  •  Back to Top  •  Refresh
Return to Board
Jump to Page   

           Page 2 of 2           

 

 Message Boards
 Tiger Rant
 Recruiting Board
 SEC Rant
 Saints Talk
 Pelicans Talk
 More Sports Board
 Soccer Board
 O-T Lounge
 Tech Board
 Outdoor Board
 Movie/TV Board
 Music Board
 Political Talk
 Money Talk
 Fark Board
 Gaming Board
 Fantasy Sports
 Food and Drink Board
 Ticket Exchange
 Help Board
 

 Other Options
 >> Search
 

 SECRant.com Links
 SEC Rant
 SEC Recruiting
 SEC Tickets
 Off-Topic Board
 

 Geaux.com Dining Guide
 New Orleans
 Baton Rouge
 

 Site Features (Full Version)
 Home Page
 LSU Football Schedule
 LSU News/TD News Wire
 Pick'em Home Page
 
Back to top
Sign In 
View in: Desktop
Copyright ©2014 TigerDroppings.com.