But it would be less effective. People respond better to negative reinforcement, and shame is one of the most effective. Thus, this will hopefully improve his behavior in regards to idiocy like that in the long run.
There's a certain level of civility expected of people when having a conversation. One you are not meeting, which is disrespectful towards the entire community, not just the person you flame.
And if anyone wants to have a civil conversation, I am more than happy to oblige. However, repeatedly insisting something equivalent in idiocy to 2+2=5,000,000 forfeits that option.
Isn't that what everyone here is doing? When it comes to it, gaming, arguing on the internet, and really most of the things the people here enjoy don't really have sufficient value to not be considered a waste of time.
That's quite pretentious of you, isn't it? I game with my therapy group, as it's a bonding exercise. I debate and theorycraft on this forum to reduce my stress levels so I can function, and your final point is a direct attack on the character of every member of this board.
Translation: "I don't like the truth! It makes me sad!
"
I game with friends. I enjoy theorycraft. Enjoyment or bonding or whatever doesn't change the fact that there's very little of value in gaming. It doesn't end cancer. It doesn't make you more economically sound. It doesn't contribute anything to the whole of humanity. It is, at the core of it, a waste of time. If the simple truth of it offends you, well, I'm really not seeing any reason to care.
If refusing to tolerate people being absurdly, idiotically wrong offends some people, they're generally the type I don't care about anyways. Anyways, at least I'm not so condescending as to accept someone being wrong, or believing that they're entitled to objectively wrong beliefs. Tolerance is rude. Far more so than I am.
Everyone is entitled to their personal beliefs, no matter how wrong they are. What they are NOT entitled to is pushing them onto others. If a person honestly believes 2+2=5, then they are welcome to live their entire lives that way, so long as it does not negatively impact other people.
Ignorance in the populace has a negative impact on everyone they're connected to. So, no, one is not entitled to the right to be so openly wrong. And, by any claim you make that they do, I can use to show the right to mock them as deserved
This is unlikely to the point of absurdity, but the point stands. Note that we punish people for their actual crimes, not their views.
"We?" "We" as in most civilized countries? Yes. We as in people? No. If you saw someone in full SS gear and Aryan Nation material going door preaching about the "master race" and the evils of the Jews, or whatever, would you have or show any respect for them? I sure as hell wouldn't. Young Earthers? Anti-vaccers? No.
All views are not equal. Treating them as such is wrong, both factually and morally.
I'm aware that you consider the mere presence of someone who is ignorant to be offensive.
No, I consider the mere presence of someone who doesn't listen to fact and reason to be offensive. If he had simply acknowledged his error, that would have been the end of it.
Tolerance is the only reason we as humans aren't killing each other over the smallest slights, so I remind you, not as a moderator or any other position of power, but as a human being worth no more or less than you are, to respect the board rules and the people you are speaking to.
Ah, another problem. The simple concept of everyone being equal simple due to their being human is absurd. Some people are simply more inherently valuable than others. This is a simple fact. Any claim that I, or anyone here is more, or even not significantly less valuable than someone such as Michio Kaku, Hawking, or anyone else of that caliber, is absurd.
Also, argument to the absurd. Nice try, though.
They have just as much right to be here as you do, and your abuse is not only unwarranted, but expressly forbidden as a requirement of visiting the boards.
And, again, I wasn't aware you were promoted. Hey, maybe I'll get the job next.
Yes.
Thats good sign, it means that you can stop 
Can does not mean will. Also, I acknowledged that I knew how much of a douche I was being, not that I actually was being one.
But it would be less effective. People respond better to negative reinforcement, and shame is one of the most effective. Thus, this will hopefully improve his behavior in regards to idiocy like that in the long run.
That is a very interesting ego you have there to believe that people care enough about your opinions, stances, beliefs, etc. to feel "shame" because you scolded them for being "wrong". I'm not sure how you expect to improve his behavior (I mean, do you expect him to learn how to "not to be wrong"?)
Quite simply, the fact that others agree with me should cement my correctness in his mind. Thus, with that and the acerbic nature of my post, it should stick with him for a while. Either that, or he's just totally incapable of listening to reason, in which case, I didn't exactly waste much time, and know that he's simply not worth bothering with in the future, unless I am simply bored.
Translation: "I really don't understand informal logic, and just think it makes me sound smart."
Translation: "I don't even know what informal logic actually is, but I'm going to say it because it makes me look smart" (See? other people can put words in your mouth as well!)
Except I was correct and you aren't. That's the key difference.
You are trying to argue that he is wrong and that he should feel shameful for being wrong, that is childish to say the least and the fact that you decide to patronize another person of which you have no idea about for not reacting the way you expected say a lot about your character (more specifically that you have an ego 100 miles wide).
I wasn't arguing that he should feel shame, I was attempting to induce feelings of shame. Most people respond better to emotion than to reason, especially the ones with fact problems.
And the knowledge I have about him, or lack thereof, doesn't change or justify the absurdity the whole thing.
How about no.
And that is a valid choice for you to make, just as likely it is for him to have his own opinion of you (that you are a "douche").
And I can live with that.
Isn't that what everyone here is doing? When it comes to it, gaming, arguing on the internet, and really most of the things the people here enjoy don't really have sufficient value to not be considered a waste of time.
That is a very nihilistic point of view.
I prefer to think about it as a rational, objective point of view.
From an external point of view, everything that we do is a waste of time, since at some point we will expire and die, thus making our efforts meaningless as a whole. Our efforts to advance our fellow man are an extension to this since eventually as a whole, the Human race will eventually die out (perhaps through Evolution or through some calamity, who knows?).
And you're missing the bigger point. Yes, I'll die, but so what? What matters is history. IMPACT! Darius I. Alexander the Great. Hammuabi. They are all remembered, and their influences are felt today. Who cares if they're dead? Oh, sure, humanity might die out in a few thousand years, but if those thousand years are glorious, and we leave our mark on the universe for millions of years to come, what's wrong with it?
And, don't particularly care. The fact that I am right speaks for itself. If refusing to tolerate people being absurdly, idiotically wrong offends some people, they're generally the type I don't care about anyways. Anyways, at least I'm not so condescending as to accept someone being wrong, or believing that they're entitled to objectively wrong beliefs. Tolerance is rude. Far more so than I am.
Hey, it's your life. You can care or not. It all starts at a choice and a consequence for that choice. You can argue that people that are wrong should be burned at the stakes and nobody would be able to stop you. I for one would tolerate you, because you are doing your job as a sentient lifeform (atleast from my perspective) which is making choices
And here we have another absurd stretch. Nice try, though.
Regardless of all of this it is kind of laughable that you are upset that he refuses to admit that he is wrong knowing full well that in that in his exact scenario if you were proven wrong you would fight tooth and nail to prove that you are correct no matter how feeble your attempts would be, but eh... I guess that is your choice 
Nope. See, facts are facts. That's the beauty of them. If I were to be proven in error, or shown I missed something, I'd be glad about it, as it means I won't be wrong in the future. But for factual matters, especially ones of this plain simplicity, there is no excuse.
If you don't mind me asking this, but whenever you incorrectly answered anything in school, were you the type of student that flipped out and cried about it? Just asking...
And now we run into the attacks. Nice, classy, and not at all hypocritical.
