Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5
404 Error: Logic not found
|
Neither is common sense in your case. Have you ever even opened a Logic textbook? You know, one with basic syllogisms such as (-A ----> A) ----> A .
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5
Case in point, I never denigrated people who do not collect the earliest.
|
But you did say:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5
Many collectors prefer the first/earliest issue. This isn't unique to sports cards, and it wasn't dreamed up by a bunch of dealers.... It's literally human nature.
|
And now you're even offering yourself up as yet another counter example!
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5
If you knew anything about me, you'd know I don't collect the earliest.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5
My argument was just that you can't support your assertion that collectors like rookies because dealers duped them into it.
|
My support comes from the fact that both the man on the street and newbie collectors are bewildered at all the fuss regarding rookie cards. Even my old childhood collecting buddy wondered decades later why rookie cards fetched more collecting interest than say the card from the player's best year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5
And I've been right all along.
|
Only in your dreams.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5
In all your walls of text, you've yet to even attempt to prove that claim. You keep making irrelevant arguments using poor logic about statements I made....
|
Were you any kind of logician, you'd know that positive assertions border on impossible to prove. But negative assertions can be disproven with one simple counter example.
For example, I provided not just one but several counter examples to your assertion that collectors naturally prefer the old.
Moreover you argued that collectors are a set distinct from consumers. This is nonsense since collectors are nonetheless a subset of consumers (and thus influenced by marketing).
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5
By the way, since it's clear it went over your head, "[citation needed]" is a meme based in wikipedia, meaning you have posted something without supporting evidence.
|
Sorry. I never claimed omniscience. Only common sense.
