Where is the neither option?
There's a reason there's an age limit on the US President. Having #Offtopic presidents that aren't even old enough to drive is a bad idea.
Not like I care about this crap-hole anymore, anyway.
English
-
I'll be able to drive in a few months
-
You are much better than magicspacecat in terms of maturity. Looking forward to driving?
-
Thank you! And yes I’m looking forward to driving, not many places to go on a island but I’m sure it will be fun
-
Hate to be that guy, but it is an age minimum, not maximum, but I get what you are saying. [spoiler]Huh, I really don't hate myself after typing that, guess I am just too damn awesome![/spoiler]
-
Hate to be that guy but he didn't say "maximum" age. He said age limit, which could be argued to mean "the age of a US president is limited to 35 years or older".
-
Yet, that is not how people view the word limit. The speed limit shows the maximum speed and in some cases, the minimum speed. There are tolerance limits, Twitter has a maximum character limit and I can go on. Limit is a maximum amount and has that signifigance attached to it.
-
Edited by dr obvious: 5/23/2018 1:33:20 AMOn some roads there is a minimum speed.
-
Yes there is.
-
Which is indeed part of the speed limit. I've already seen your 30 message argument with someone else, so I will not fight you over it. I will admit that using the term limit could be confusing, although it works.
-
Yeah, it did not even need to be an argument. Oh well.
-
I thought you left this place. What made you come back?
-
A friend was passing away, so I came back to say goodbye and got stuck here.
-
Incorrect. "Lower limit" is a term that is used often in programming and mathematics. Regardless, he didn't use the term "maximum", anyway.
-
This is not programming or mathematics now, is it? Nope. Bringing a small subgroup in doesn't really help your argument, it just says there is a small group that have changed the common meaning to suit their specific purpose. I did not say he specifically said maximum either, I used the word maximum to highlight the common meaning of the word limit.
-
The definition of "lower limit": The smallest possible quantity. In this case - age (quantity of years). It doesn't have to deal with programming or mathematics. I was providing examples of how lower limits are used after you said "limit is a maximum amount". It isn't. You also said, "it's an age minimum, not maximum", implying he said maximum.
-
[quote]The definition of "lower limit": The smallest possible quantity. In this case - age (quantity of years). It doesn't have to deal with programming or mathematics. I was providing examples of how lower limits are used after you said "limit is a maximum amount". It isn't. You also said, "it's an age minimum, not maximum", implying he said maximum.[/quote] Yet he never said lower limit, now did he, you did and posting the definition of "lower limit"does not support your argument. The common definition of limit itself is maximum, it us not until the 5th definition does it support your obscure point. Dictionaries list them in order from commonly used to obscure use. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/limit You can't apply your random point to my direct point, it does not work. If you said, "fun fact", then your point would work against what I said. All you are doing is trying to make me debate this from a different angle that has no true basis on my argument. You can continue trying to debate this from whatever esoteric angle you want, but it does not change the actual break down of what I said in relation to what he said. No, I did not imply anything, I said exactly what I meant to say, which served the point of making a correlation between the common usage of limit, which is maximum.
-
Edited by Flynn: 5/22/2018 4:18:02 PMDid you read the first definition that comes up in the link you provided? [quote]something that bounds, restrains, or confines the age limit for junior golf[/quote] This can mean the age limit is confined to a range of say, 13-15 year olds. Even the fifth definition on the list says: [quote]a prescribed maximum or minimum amount, quantity, or number[/quote] See that "or" word there followed by the word "minimum"? So the very link you provided says it can be both, as I'm saying. Congratulations, you played yourself.
-
No, I did not play myself, though thanks for telling me your maturity level. I notice you ignored the nice little descriptions it gave as an explanation of the meaning, so let's look at it. "Definition of limit 1a : something that bounds, restrains, or confines [u]the age limit for junior golf[/u] b : the utmost extent [u]pushed her body to the limit[/u]" See those 2 underlined parts that you chose to ignore as a part of the whole? Those show you how the word is intended to be used. It shows a maximum, not a minimum. If you had paid the proper amount of attention to those 2 parts in there, then you would have been strengthening my point, not yours, so you once more selected only that bit which would strengthen your point and conveniently left out the whole. Did you even read what I said? I pointed out that the 5th one down was where it supported your argument. Yeah, you had to go down to the 5th one out of 7 to find where it supported your point.
-
[quote]I pointed out that the 5th one down was where it supported your argument. Yeah, you had to go down to the 5th one out of 7 to find where it supported your point.[/quote] So you agree that limit can refer to either minimum or maximum, then? Excellent! It's OK to be wrong sometimes. You're just going to have to accept it on this one and move on.
-
In an obscure point, yes, which has nothing to do with how it is commonly viewed. You still refuse to understand that the common use of limit is maximum, which is what I was saying from the beginning and you are doing everything you can to ignore that clarifying point. This is not a win for you, and me having to waste my time trying to explain and keep you on track would never have amounted to a win for me, even if you had acknowledged my point. My ego does not need a win, I did you the courtesy of treating you like an adult and explaining my reasons while you went off on your obscure tangents.
-
It's not an obscure point at all, no matter how many times you say it is. The fact of the matter is that it is completely incorrect to refer to "limit" solely in terms of "maximum". I didn't go off on any tangents, whatsoever. You saying that most people don't refer to it that way is your opinion, not necessarily fact. That's the tangent here. You say your ego does not need a win when it's clear that it does considering you're continuing this charade of being obtuse. I actually thought you were trolling after you provided a definition that proved my point so I made a joke that "you played yourself". You can think of me as immature because of that if you'd like but lighten up, man. It was a joke. Again, it's OK to be wrong once in a while. No need to get upset over it.
-
It is an obscure point. It is not my opinion, you just refuse to see that. You just insist on being right, but yeah, I am the troll here, I am the one who needs to lighten up. You call me obtuse, yet you refuse to see every single point I make and you go off on tangents, like it or not. Even when you posted your definition, it was not the definition of limit, it was lower limit. You brought up how it is a math and programming thing. You refused to even acknowledge how the word was used when you copied it down from my definition, even when I highlighted it. You can not even wake up and understand that it was not about a win, for -blam!-s sake, is that all you can talk about? You had a differing point that I addressed to clarify my point. Then you had to keep going to try and prove you were right while never getting what I was saying and still not getting it. The only way this would have been a win, is if we had both walked away understanding each other and acknowledging our points had merit and we passed that point a long time ago. You could not even see that I was acknowledging your point from the start, you were too wrapped up in your own head. -blam!- it, I am wasting my time talking to a -blam!-ing wall.
-
[quote]It is an obscure point. It is not my opinion, you just refuse to see that. You just insist on being right, but yeah, I am the troll here, I am the one who needs to lighten up.[/quote] Saying that the most common use of "limit" is in terms of maximum is definitely opinion. You can't back that up with anything other than what you believe to be true. [quote]You call me obtuse, yet you refuse to see every single point I make and you go off on tangents, like it or not. Even when you posted your definition, it was not the definition of limit, it was lower limit. You brought up how it is a math and programming thing. You refused to even acknowledge how the word was used when you copied it down from my definition, even when I highlighted it.[/quote] I used the definition of lower limit to show that what you were talking about is really "upper limit". I used math and programming as examples to help you understand, which I've already mentioned so I'm not ignoring anything. [quote]You can not even wake up and understand that it was not about a win, for -blam!-s sake, is that all you can talk about? You had a differing point that I addressed to clarify my point. Then you had to keep going to try and prove you were right while never getting what I was saying and still not getting it. The only way this would have been a win, is if we had both walked away understanding each other and acknowledging our points had merit and we passed that point a long time ago. You could not even see that I was acknowledging your point from the start, you were too wrapped up in your own head.[/quote] When you say things like "limit is a maximum amount" - sorry, but that's wrong. Win/loss, right/wrong, call it whatever you like. Me pointing that out to you is no different than you pointing out (incorrectly) what you did to the OP. I've already acknowledged your overall point which was that "limit is most commonly used to describe maximum". However, again, that is an opinion. Even if I were to disagree with that, that would be my opinion. It has no merit based on fact. The fact is, limit can mean both minimum and maximum. That's it. That's all. It's not obscure. It's not an opinion. It's a fact. [quote]-blam!- it, I am wasting my time talking to a -blam!-ing wall.[/quote] On this, we can agree. I feel exactly the same.
-
Yet you came back to say the same baseless bullshit. When you get your license go break the speed limit and tell the cop your bs, I am sure he will laugh his ass off as he writes your ticket. Go stand in line at a 20 items or less aisle with 30 items and tell everyone your bs. Do you not understand what that dictionary reference was and how it was used? No, of course not, because then you can't say you won. The first definition in a dictionary refers to common usage and the text shows how it is used. You can't use limit to describe a minimum without a quantifier in front of it such as lower. Not that you are willing to admit that. The further down the list you go, the less used the definition is for that term. So no, that means it is not opinion. Many words have different meanings and the meanings can change with different quantifiers in front of them. See if you can figure out the meaning of this, I have reached the limit of my patience with you.
-
[quote]Yet you came back to say the same baseless bullshit. When you get your license go break the speed limit and tell the cop your bs, I am sure he will laugh his ass off as he writes your ticket. Go stand in line at a 20 items or less aisle with 30 items and tell everyone your bs.[/quote] These are examples of upper limits so I wouldn't do that and I'm not arguing anything like that at all. My argument is that the word "limit" has multiple meanings and apparently, you're struggling with the differences between them considering your original argument was that "limit" solely refers to maximum. You then backtracked to say that it's actually just most commonly used that way once you realized you were wrong. [quote]Do you not understand what that dictionary reference was and how it was used? No, of course not, because then you can't say you won. The first definition in a dictionary refers to common usage and the text shows how it is used. You can't use limit to describe a minimum without a quantifier in front of it such as lower. Not that you are willing to admit that.[/quote] Of course I do. I've already said it can refer to [i]both[/i] things. The example provided in that definition is "the age limit for junior golf". This can be interpreted as either, say, the lower limit of 13 or the upper limit of 15. It's a matter of opinion and interpretation. Yet I'm the one refusing to acknowledge anything the other is saying. Interesting. [quote]The further down the list you go, the less used the definition is for that term. So no, that means it is not opinion.[/quote] Despite the fact that the first definition can be interpreted in different ways, you're saying that the order in which multiple definitions appear in the dictionary determine the relevancy of each? Tell me more about obscure tangents. If anything, the follow up definitions help make sense of the different ways the first one can be interpreted. [quote]Many words have different meanings and the meanings can change with different quantifiers in front of them.[/quote] I agree, that's why I'm trying to explain to you that there's more to "limit" than "maximum" or "upper". [quote]See if you can figure out the meaning of this, I have reached the limit of my patience with you.[/quote] Likewise. Give it up.