MoonShadow/FlameWar

BNF: MoonShadow/FlameWar

A: all crows are stripy
B: It is quite obvious that it is not the case that all crows are stripy
A: The evidence clearly shows that all crows are stripy .
B: Sir, you are a buffoon.
A: You're quite wrong, the moon is flat
B: Anyone who thinks the moon is flat is clearly a buffoon.

A: all llamas are stripy
B: It is clearly not true that all llamas are stripy .
A: The evidence clearly shows that all llamas are stripy .
B: You're quite wrong, all llamas are black
A: Sir, you are a buffoon.
B: You're quite wrong, the moon is made of green cheese
A: Please respond to the points I actually made.
B: It should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that the moon is made of green cheese .
A: It is quite obvious that it is not the case that the moon is made of green cheese

SunKitten has seen this type of misdirection many, many times on NewsGroups :)

A: the moon is flat
B: You're quite wrong, the moon is flat
A: Since you disagree with me, I can only assume you don't know enough about the subject. Go read a book, and don't talk about the subject any more until you agree with my views on it.
B: It should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that calling people names is unacceptable .
A: It is clearly not true that calling people names is unacceptable .
B: It should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that calling people names is unacceptable .
A: It is clearly not true that calling people names is unacceptable .
B: The evidence clearly shows that calling people names is unacceptable .
A: Sir, you are a buffoon.
B: Anyone who thinks calling people names is not unacceptable is clearly a buffoon.

I'm not sure that this couldn't be called a feature - but you can get the first flamer gettings its logic in a twist:
all crows are black
all crows are self-evidently not black .

Um - what's wrong with those? They seem to contradict like they're supposed to.. - MoonShadow

Misconnection of the 'all' - It is self evident that not all crows are black - ok. It is not, however, self evident that all crows are non-black. Which is, of course, the kind ofg logic trap flamers often fall into ;) --Vitenka

: Oh, yes, OK - I was trying to get the contradiction right first :) - MoonShadow

todo: bigger phrase banks, threading, more statement classes; insult sense is still buggy occasionally.

DouglasReay suggests adding the following chains:

 politics, religion, crime - guns
 spelling correction, news, expressing disagreement - censorship
 science fiction, films, literature - heinlein
 guns, censorship, heinlein - nazis, hitler, fascism
 nazis, hitler, fascism - godwin's law

Can you integrate text/concepts from the following?
http://lwn.net/Articles/229749/ --B


bnf ::=  _newSpeaker _statement _crlf _war

option ::= spaces = 0
option ::= evil = 1

_sense ::= for
_insulted ::= notInsulted
_speaker ::= B
_repicked ::= no

_war ::= _newSpeaker _switchSense _war##_sense
_war_against ::= _against _crlf | _against _crlf _war | _against _crlf _war | _against _crlf _war 
_war_for ::= _for _crlf | _for _crlf _war | _for _crlf _war | _for _crlf _war

_insult ::= "Sir, you are a buffoon. " _insult_rebut | "Anyone who thinks " _y _neg _z "is clearly a buffoon. " _insult_rebut | "Since you disagree with me, I can only assume you don't know enough about the subject. Go read a book, and don't talk about the subject any more until you agree with my views on it." _insult_rebut
_statement ::= _pick_statement

_for ::= <_neg::=_negative> _for_
_for_ ::= "It should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that " _y _z "." | "The evidence clearly shows that " _y _z "." | _insult | _repick##_repicked | "You're wrong."

_against ::= <_neg::=_nothing> _against_
_against_ ::= "It is clearly not true that " _y _z "." | _y "self-evidently not " _z "." | "It is not evident that " _y _z "." | "It is quite obvious that it is not the case that " _y _z | _insult | _repick##_repicked | "I dispute your premise." | "I don't know of a better way to put it: you're wrong."

_insult_rebut ::= <_sense::=against> <x::=_insult_rebut_x> <_y::=_insult_rebut_y> <_z::=_insult_rebut_z>
/* _switchSense##_insulted */
_insult_rebut_x ::= _insult_rebut_y _insult_rebut_z
_insult_rebut_y ::= "calling people names is "
_insult_rebut_z ::= "unacceptable "

_pick_statement ::= _allXareY_part1{_y} _allXareY_part2{_z} | _theXisY_part1{_y} _theXisY_part2{_z}
_allXareY_part1 ::= "all crows are " | "all llamas are "
_allXareY_part2 ::= "black " | "stripy "
_theXisY_part1 ::= "the earth is " | "the moon is "
_theXisY_part2 ::= "flat " | "made of green cheese "

_nothing ::= __nothing
__nothing ::= ""
_negative ::= __negative
__negative ::= "not "

_switchSense ::= _switchSense##_sense
_switchSense_for ::= <_sense::=against>
_switchSense_against ::= <_sense::=for>
_switchSense_notInsulted ::= _switchSense <_insulted::=Insulted>
_switchSense_Insulted ::= ""

_newSpeaker ::= _newSpeaker##_speaker{_speaker} ": "
_newSpeaker_A ::= B
_newSpeaker_B ::= A

_repick_no ::= "You're quite wrong, " _statement <_repicked::=_yes> <_repicker::=_speaker>
_repick_yes ::= _repick_yes##_repicker##_speaker
_repick_yes_A_A ::= _dodge
_repick_yes_B_B ::= _dodge
_repick_yes_A_B ::= _spotnonsequitur
_repick_yes_B_A ::= _spotnonsequitur
_spotnonsequitur ::= "What relevance does that have? " | "Isn't that a non sequitur? " | "Please respond to the points I actually made. " | "...so? "
_dodge ::= _repick_no 

_yes ::= yes

_crlf ::= <BR>

CategoryGenerator