Posted April 11, 2021
![avatar](http://images.gog.com/e4495424ef965e49f7007294d87e8f861df6e29da00a9b38cbb4c41716f294d1_avm.jpg)
Stating something like that A is better than B in an argument is not an indication of an 'agenda'. Try again.
And I'm sure if you asked or wanted to actually continue the discussion instead of attacking him and insulting him, you might find out about why is Linux better than Windows, i.e. his 'facts'. He already mentioned some.
I think you're confused.
If something is subjectively determined and influenced by eg. tastes or preferences or factors that are individual and personal, then you can't in the same vein claim definitively that 'facts will definitively show that A is better than B for all/the majority'. It's a contradiction, one of many used in your argumentation.
I think you got your signals mixed up there, buddy, and now that you're incredibly defensive you can't admit to it. That's ok, this is after all an internet discussion between anonymous strangers trying to score points and grow their e-peen. Really important stuff. /s
Actually, it's more like you 'call' an agenda everywhere you think you see it, for no reason.
There were plenty in our previous discussion, if you want me to dig them up, I can. But in this discussion alone so far, you've managed already a few. You've called someone in a video gaming forum a 'close-minded zealot blinded by an agenda' and implied he is arguing in bad faith. About an operating system discussion. Might wanna tone it down a notch there mate.
"you are quite clearly a Linux zealot, no doubt in my mind about that at all.
Luckily, when replying to you, I was really replying for the sake of others who are a bit more open-minded and not blinded by a Linux agenda like you are."
That is a personal attack with no place in a discussion, just because you felt like saying it as if you couldn't argue properly otherwise. If anything, it inhibits discussion and is just plain rude, but whatever floats your boat dude, if you think it makes your case stronger. *Spoiler alert* it doesn't.
![avatar](http://images.gog.com/e4495424ef965e49f7007294d87e8f861df6e29da00a9b38cbb4c41716f294d1_avm.jpg)
He qualifies every which way I look at it.
What extra would he need to be, to be a Zealot?
Or has he become convinced that Linux is better than Windows through years of close interaction with both products, and he knows what he's talking about? I.e. he has all the facts with him and has decided on one side? How does that make him a fanatical zealot?
Call him a realist if you have to call him something. And oh look! It's not a slur.
It's worth noting vv221 can easily defend himself and I have no vested interest in defending a random forum goer. Other than disliking the way you argue and attack others yet again for differing opinions or argumentation, Timboli.
![avatar](http://images.gog.com/e4495424ef965e49f7007294d87e8f861df6e29da00a9b38cbb4c41716f294d1_avm.jpg)
I'm open, he isn't
Here is you claiming that facts show Linux is worse for the majority:
"I wish Linux was better than Windows, I honestly do ... and for some people it is ... however, not the majority, as the facts will show you."
Which facts are those? Nobody knows. Almost as if you 'qualified' to being a zealot according to your own (dubious) criteria.
![avatar](http://images.gog.com/e4495424ef965e49f7007294d87e8f861df6e29da00a9b38cbb4c41716f294d1_avm.jpg)
At worst I am saying his enthusiasm and bias for Linux is misleading and blinding him to other factors.
Some happily admit to being a zealot.
You should take a step back and realise how you come across in a sensible discussion about the pros and cons of operating systems in a vidya gaming forum. It's not pretty, due to your rampant accusations of an imaginary 'agenda' and being a close-minded zealot when stating A is better than B due to facts that people can happily go into.
But who wants to talk to you now??