- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Best Way to Make a Bad Name Good
Posted on 12/5/12 at 12:17 pm to 42
Posted on 12/5/12 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.
It's not a bad name though. Just a little different.
0
Posted on 12/5/12 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.
Posted on 12/5/12 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.
Posted on 12/5/12 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.
Posted on 12/5/12 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.Posted on 12/5/12 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.
Posted on 12/5/12 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.
Posted on 12/5/12 at 12:33 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:
oh so subtle sir, there are reasons for that.
Posted on 12/5/12 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 12/5/12 at 12:35 pm
Posted on 12/5/12 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.
Posted on 12/5/12 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.
Posted on 12/5/12 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.
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.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News