Countering a Counter?

[Luxlord]

not that new of a card but if your guess was Counter Counter you were right!!

 

good side deck card? or just another bad piece of paper?

lets see what our viewers say...

[J-Max]

Hmmmmmm On one side it Negates a Counter Trap without paying Points like Seven Tools forces you to. But then again you can only Counter Counter Traps with this one. Seven Tools kills All Traps. But then again most people would say "Run Solemn"

[Luxlord]

but you can negate solemn with this... what to do, what to do?

[Azuh]

to situational

 

its better to let Solemn do its thing anyways, or you just chain Dark Bribe / Solemn to that SOlemn

[Fh-Fh]

Counter Fairies.

[zelda_tp_fan]

Most of my counter counters are misprints <_<

 

They just take up space in my binder right now...

[Sixty]

Countering a counter is fun. On DMU, I used dark bribe on a card my opponent activated, he then activated solemn, I activated another bribe and then he solemn'd that. XD

 

On topic: Meh card is meh.

[iAmNateXero]

my friend went 6-0 at jump before 6-4 using counter counter. Im a beliver now.

[Pharaoh_Atem]

Useless thread

[iAmNateXero]

Atem whats the matter? Its like you only come online now (that i have notice) to say pointless thread.

[2sick4u]

Useless thread

Useless post. -_-".

 

On topic: It does a job' date=' albeit a job done better by others. O.o".

Just to throw it in there, what a retarded name. "Counter Counter".

2sick~[/size']

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

Bad card is bad. Solemn and Bribe are way better and less situational. NEXT!

[Pharaoh_Atem]

Useless thread

Useless post. -_-".

 

Wrong.

 

1) For a thread or post to not be useless, it must be useful - it must have a use.

 

This thread has no use, as there's no use to discussing Counter Counter. Discussing Counter Counter, though, is the topic of the thread, and the topic of the thread must be useful for the thread to be useful.

 

However, my post is useful.

 

It is common for useless threads to appear in this forum.

 

The users commonly believe said threads are not useless. They are wrong.

 

It is useful to tell the truth about things, especially when telling the truth stands a chance of correcting wrong people.

 

Therefore, my post - but not the thread - is useful.

[Luxlord]

if the thread is useless people will let it die... or it will be locked, but never did I say this thread was useful

[2sick4u]

Useless thread

Useless post. -_-".

 

Wrong.

 

1) For a thread or post to not be useless' date=' it must be useful - it must have a use.

 

This thread has no use, as there's no use to discussing Counter Counter. Discussing Counter Counter, though, is the topic of the thread, and the topic of the thread must be useful for the thread to be useful.

 

However, my post is useful.

 

It is common for useless threads to appear in this forum.

 

The users commonly believe said threads are not useless. They are wrong.

 

It is useful to tell the truth about things, especially when telling the truth stands a chance of correcting wrong people.

 

Therefore, my post - but not the thread - is useful.

[/quote']

Pfft. Your ass isn't a good place to keep your head, Atem.

Firstly, why would you number your first only point? A little idiotic, Don't you think?

Anyway..If I get your post right..

You're saying that the thread is useless, whilst your post is useful.

YOU'RE saying that people who believe these threads have a purpose, are wrong.

You know what's wrong with those points?

The fact that you're wrong.

All you happened to do, was call the thread useless, call your post useful, and then not provide grounds as to why.

Pfft.

Don't even think "But talking about 'counter counter' has no purpose." Since, morally speaking, it does. Not everyone merely knows when a card is better than another, not everyone knows when there is a card like this out there, considering the amount of yu-gi-oh cards existent are extremely vast.

Besides that, your post was useless.

Not attributing to the discussion at all is completely useless.

If you put "Useless thread. But Dark Bribe's better." I wouldn't of cared.

But you remained arrogant as ever, thinking that your arrogance would be intimidation towards the other members to sway there beliefs to your own.

The author wanted to know about the card, and if it could be useful.

Don't think that's a good idea for the forum? bite me, it's the way it is.

-_-".

You're not a moderator, since the usefulness of threads is their call.

2sick~

[Sixty]

Useless thread

Useless post. -_-".

 

Wrong.

 

1) For a thread or post to not be useless' date=' it must be useful - it must have a use.

 

This thread has no use, as there's no use to discussing Counter Counter. Discussing Counter Counter, though, is the topic of the thread, and the topic of the thread must be useful for the thread to be useful.

 

However, my post is useful.

 

It is common for useless threads to appear in this forum.

 

The users commonly believe said threads are not useless. They are wrong.

 

It is useful to tell the truth about things, especially when telling the truth stands a chance of correcting wrong people.

 

Therefore, my post - but not the thread - is useful.

[/quote']

Pfft. Your ass isn't a good place to keep your head, Atem.

Firstly, why would you number your first only point? A little idiotic, Don't you think?

Anyway..If I get your post right..

You're saying that the thread is useless, whilst your post is useful.

YOU'RE saying that people who believe these threads have a purpose, are wrong.

You know what's wrong with those points?

The fact that you're wrong.

All you happened to do, was call the thread useless, call your post useful, and then not provide grounds as to why.

Pfft.

Don't even think "But talking about 'counter counter' has no purpose." Since, morally speaking, it does. Not everyone merely knows when a card is better than another, not everyone knows when there is a card like this out there, considering the amount of yu-gi-oh cards existent are extremely vast.

Besides that, your post was useless.

Not attributing to the discussion at all is completely useless.

If you put "Useless thread. But Dark Bribe's better." I wouldn't of cared.

But you remained arrogant as ever, thinking that your arrogance would be intimidation towards the other members to sway there beliefs to your own.

The author wanted to know about the card, and if it could be useful.

Don't think that's a good idea for the forum? bite me, it's the way it is.

-_-".

You're not a moderator, since the usefulness of threads is their call.

2sick~

 

 

Fighting logic with logic, eh 2sick?

 

I find 2sick's logic to be the most sensible.

[iAmNateXero]

^2sic, too harsh. *Sings "Why Can't we be friends."*

 

on topic, I think this card has serious potential only in tournaments, simply because in every tournament, almost EVERY BODY runs solmen.

[pizzaman]

Question is, do you actually have space to run 3 Counter Counters, just for the sake of countering a Solemn, or to a lesser extent, Bribe?

 

Assuming you also run 3 Solemns and are considering to use Counter Counter, using Bribe in place of that is much better.

[iAmNateXero]

^i guess, but what can the poor afford? (and welcome back, haven't seen u around the forums much)

[pizzaman]

^i guess' date=' but what can the poor afford?

[/quote']

Ah yes...

 

Your wallet is always a factor in RL cards.

Kinda forgot about that, since I'm an avid proxy user right now.

[Gogeta™]

Okay so this card counters a counter, so this card can counter its self?

[Luxlord]

I would imagine so lol

[NeoPaladin2008]

lol this x3 vs solemn x3 vs bribe x3

I solemn!

I bribe!

I counter counter!

I bribe!

I counter counter!

I solemn!

I bribe!

I solemn!

I counter counter!

epic :D

[Pharaoh_Atem]

Atem whats the matter? Its like you only come online now (that i have notice) to say pointless thread.

 

I've seen more pointless threads now than earlier. It's a fair cop.

 

 

Useless thread

Useless post. -_-".

 

Wrong.

 

1) For a thread or post to not be useless' date=' it must be useful - it must have a use.

 

This thread has no use, as there's no use to discussing Counter Counter. Discussing Counter Counter, though, is the topic of the thread, and the topic of the thread must be useful for the thread to be useful.

 

However, my post is useful.

 

It is common for useless threads to appear in this forum.

 

The users commonly believe said threads are not useless. They are wrong.

 

It is useful to tell the truth about things, especially when telling the truth stands a chance of correcting wrong people.

 

Therefore, my post - but not the thread - is useful.

[/quote']

Pfft. Your ass isn't a good place to keep your head, Atem.

Hence why it isn't there.

 

It would behoove you to stick to the facts instead of your inane opinions - otherwise, the only thing any rational person envisions you doing is going "BAWWW" the whole time you read anything that argues against you.

 

Firstly' date=' why would you number your [s']first[/s] only point? A little idiotic, Don't you think?

 

Aye, thought I typed up another point. Faux pas noted - it's not so much idiotic as it is careless, but I don't need to be careful.

 

Anyway..If I get your post right..

You're saying that the thread is useless' date=' whilst your post is useful.[/size']

 

Correct.

 

YOU'RE saying that people who believe these threads have a purpose' date=' are wrong.[/size']

 

Correct.

 

You know what's wrong with those points?

The fact that you're wrong.

 

Without evidence and warrant' date=' your claim can't stand. I've already given my evidence and warrant. However, what you've given above and below... do not work as warrant.

 

All you happened to do, was call the thread useless, call your post useful, and then not provide grounds as to why.

 

Incorrect. As I said before, faux pas preserved and all:

 

1) For a thread or post to not be useless, it must be useful - it must have a use.

 

This thread has no use, as there's no use to discussing Counter Counter. Discussing Counter Counter, though, is the topic of the thread, and the topic of the thread must be useful for the thread to be useful.

 

However, my post is useful.

 

It is common for useless threads to appear in this forum.

 

The users commonly believe said threads are not useless. They are wrong.

 

It is useful to tell the truth about things, especially when telling the truth stands a chance of correcting wrong people.

 

Therefore, my post - but not the thread - is useful.

 

The evidence and warrant are right there, clear as crystal: the topic is useless; the topic must be useful for the thread to be useful; things are either useless or useful, without any sort of in-between.

 

Pfft.

Don't even think "But talking about 'counter counter' has no purpose."

 

I'll think what I like' date=' seeing that I only think such things when they're correct.

 

Since, morally speaking, it does. Not everyone merely knows when a card is better than another,

 

This assumes that educating weak duelists about better v. worse somehow makes talking about "Counter Counter" useful.

 

The discussion about "Counter Counter" is summed up in one small sentence: "It is obsolete, and while it is the worst card of its sort, it's not even the easiest card of that sort to obtain."

 

Not everyone knows these precise details, but they don't need to - anyone with access to a "Counter Counter" that wasn't given to them as a gift, has easier access to "Seven Tools of the Bandit".

 

To instruct about cards that fit no purpose for anyone other than diehards who run rarely-run cards for the sake of running them... is a waste of time.

 

Said diehards already have the remainder of the internet's sources to find said rarely-run cards, said sources rendering this thread obsolete. They also have better ways to find those sources, such as the search bar in every Internet Browser presently supported.

 

Time would be well spent instructing about cards that actually matter in some way, shape, or form. As this card matters not to the competitive, nor to the budget, nor to any mix between, it is a waste of time for those in this forum to discuss it.

 

It is not useful to waste time.

 

However, the thread's topic require that we waste time.

 

Hence, the thread is not useful, it is useless.

 

not everyone knows when there is a card like this out there' date=' considering the amount of yu-gi-oh cards existent are extremely vast. [/size']

 

This does not justify this thread being useful - just because "not every person who should know ______, actually does know ______" does not make a pisspoor source of information on _______ useful.

 

To be useful, time must not be wasted on it. Time is wasted on this thread when it is used as a source for information on Counter Counter.

 

Namely, this thread also suffers from being a pisspoor source of information, in part because everything in the thread IS horribly obvious to all but the most dense persons. Even everything I've said is basic kiddygrade stuff.

 

For example...

Okay so this card counters a counter' date=' so this card can counter its self?

[/quote']

 

The rulebook would be a better source of information for this tidbit. The rulebook is kiddygrade stuff, as this game is marketed to such levels.

 

I think this card has serious potential only in tournaments' date=' simply because in every tournament, almost EVERY BODY runs solmen.

[/quote']

 

The thread is a worse source of information also because of inaccurate info like the above quote.

 

Nate, I note your sympathy toward keeping the gloves on, but it's true that Counter Counter has no potential anywhere, and isn't the cheapest option of its ilk. You are indeed wrong to think it has potential in tournaments.

 

While you note that Solemn is prevalent, you forget the warrant for your claim. The warrant has to be infallible; what you're trying to use as warrant is "This stops Solemn, so it's got potential", which is a very fallible point.

 

Besides that' date=' your post was useless.

Not attributing to the discussion [u']at all[/u] is completely useless.

 

This happens to contain at least two fallacies - the appeals to authority and tradition.

 

It does so by making the point that something is useless unless it conforms to either the established authority's preferred method, or the prior method used.

 

I think that the naturalistic fallacy also fits - that because it is natural to respond to the present discussion, it is somehow "good" or "right" to do so. You allege my post to be useless for not responding to the present discussion, which is bad in your eyes, thus requiring that responding to the present discussion be good in your eyes.

 

Unless you can eliminate those fallacies, your argument is rendered invalid all the way through.

 

If you put "Useless thread. But Dark Bribe's better." I wouldn't of cared.

But you remained arrogant as ever' date=' thinking that your arrogance would be intimidation towards the other members to sway there beliefs to your own.[/size']

 

It's a cute piece of fiction.

 

Arrogance is:

The taking of too much upon oneself as one's right; the assertion of unwarrantable claims in respect of one's own importance; undue assumption of dignity, authority, or knowledge; aggressive conceit, presumption, or haughtiness.

 

I have taken no rights here, nor have I asserted unwarrantable claims in respect of my importance. I'm a random poster on a forum, just like you, and if you did things in the manner I did them, you'd not be in the wrong for it.

 

I assume no undue dignity, authority, or knowledge; I merely state fact as it is. I am not aggressive, nor am I conceited, presumptuous, or haughty.

 

I cannot think myself to be arrogant without evidence supporting such.

 

So, I am not arrogant, unless you can somehow bring up evidence and warrant the claim.

 

Further, you assume in the above that I posted with the intent to have my "arrogance" intimidate and/or others. This is an unwarranted claim as well, as you've no evidence nor a warrant for that evidence. The claim fails without its support.

 

 

All you're doing now is making undue accusations and attacks on my character; ad hominems fit another sort of fallacy.

 

 

The author wanted to know about the card' date='[/size']

 

He knew about the card as soon as he saw a picture of the whole thing. Making a thread helps him to know the card no better, which again would make the thread a waste of time.

 

and if it could be useful.

 

There are' date=' again, better sources for that information than this place.

 

If he's worried about uses at Locals, he'd be best served by going to his local whatever and ask folks there who actually know the Locals.

 

If he's worried about Regs, he'd be best served by looking online for various bits of information about his region, instead of petitioning random people across the world.

 

If he's worried about National level events, he'd go online and take in info on a National level. This forum can do that, but it's a poor source for such when compared to the alternatives - said best alternative usually being one's own national-level teammates.

 

He's definitely not worried about World level events, but if he were, he'd be talking to other amazing players, not random players who couldn't duel their way out of a paper bag.

 

Don't think that's a good idea for the forum?

 

Oh, it's fine to ask the forum its opinion, as long as one realizes the quality of opinion for what it is - poor.

 

bite me' date=' it's the way it is.

-_-".[/size']

 

Appeal to tradition. Fallacy.

 

You're not a moderator' date=' since the usefulness of threads is their call.

2sick~

[/size']

 

Appeal to authority. Fallacy.

 

 

Either stick to logic or quit your case.

[Sixty]

And, as usual, Atem has just dissected every statement against him, then shot it in the face.