I am using a commonplace classification, you are arguing against its practical usefulness without anything material. Things don't turn into opinions just because that would suit you; you are inventing a false dichotomy here in a very liberal way in that everything is an opinion and thusly never wrong. Making this out to be a 50/50 thing because you and I are two people that argue opposing views is a fallacy. One of us can be wrong, one of us could be more right, there could be a number of different answers out of which you have one and I another. So no, this is not a matter of opinion.Restomaniac wrote: ↑06 Feb 2018, 14:43But it is. You have decided that an argument for a classification that suits you is correct when other arguments disagree with that classification. Because it suits your argument.hurril wrote: ↑06 Feb 2018, 13:57No, that is not an opinion of mine, it's a classification that has practical value and is used by others. You opposing it is based on your opinion of forums as not social media. I have no vested interest in forum classification; you have when you choose to respond to the blatant contradiction.Restomaniac wrote: ↑06 Feb 2018, 12:57In your opinion and this is the point. There are plenty of sources that say it is and plenty that say it isn't those are backed by the fact that the timeline doesn't work.
Point is it's a spilt opinion and could be argued either way. However what cannot be argued is that the post you originally replied to was totally 100% about social media. You were so quick to jump on it that it didn't occur to you that there isn't 100% agreement on your point.
You are the one claiming that a shovel is not a kind of spade. A spade is a spade to me.
Good luck trying to clear snow off a path with a spade.
You could make the exact same argument had the guy argued that Facebook is not an example of a social media. Do you understand this? This implies that your argument has no merit.