User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-6032121-20200517150418/@comment-45692830-20200618225358

Technically he described a scenario that occurred "last week" after someone asked him how writing those extracts felt. Again, I fully concede that he wrote them for the event. That's not under contention. What's under contention is whether the criteria being argued for invalidating Monk equally apply to Script Extract.

Also, to call this a strawman is utterly absurd. This is a reductio ad absurdum. Obviously the person having their position reduced to absurdity doesn't want the absurdity to be on the table, as it would invalidate the original position. But the issue is if the absurdity is the logical conclusion of the reasoning presented in the original position, then the original position must be false. So, yes, I'm attempting to make his attempt look bad. In the sense that I'm attempting to show that the logic used, if taken seriously, takes us to an absurd position.

Similarly, to say that Monk sticks out is just bizarre. It only sticks out because you ignore all of the similarities Scrooge and I have pointed out.