You would be the only one...
How do you take a word like "spin/spun" and give it the meaning of a "strong view"?
I wouldn't advise continuing to argue with Scaff. He has you over a barrel, as it were.
As for "Strong view" please note the context was "strong view towards one side" that might not have been the best choice of the words but basically it means to put forth a meaning with a very biased viewpoint while maintaining plausability.
When you spin something, you put the strongest meaning that can be legitimately heald with it. You do not just get to make up a meaning that might be close but is patently wrong. When you do that it's just wrong or lying.
Example of spin:
Anti gay preacher is caught on film with gay prostitute.
Spin: He hired the gay prostitute (not realizing at the time he was gay) as a luggage handler due to preachers back problems and upon learning he was gay kept him on in an attempt to privately help him reform his gay ways.
This is spin. It is spinning the situation to look strongly in favor of the anti gay preacher while remaining plausible.
Not spin: He was not in the vicinity of the gay prostituted.
There is picture evidence that he was in the vicinity of the gay prostitute. This is not spin, simply factually incorrect and denial.
One is plausible although extremely questionable. That is spin, not (with the current information) absolutely proveably false or innacurate, however a viewpoint strongly from one side.
The other is not plausible - it is not spin, it is simply a lie or wrong.
That is what spin is. If spin simply meant saying anything you want regardless of if it is plausible or not, it would not be countered with factual evidence to deny it.
Example Picture of anti gay preacher and gay prostitute shows preacher carrying all baggage and gay prostitute carrying none.
This removes the plausibility of the claim and the claim is no longer spining the facts but mearly a fabrication.
Any of us exposed to mainstream media are constantly confronted with this, so I am not sure how it can be of question what it means. Watch Fox News (Spins facts in favor of republicans) or MSNBC (spins facts in favor of Dems) and then watch those spin jobs get rebutted with facts that disprove them.
Before being disproveable, they are plausible and spin. After being disproved they are simply incorrect or lies.
To claim that the statement about viewpoints could be spun the way it was claimed is simply incorrect or false. It could be missunderstood, miscontrued or desired to be understood that way, but it cannot be plasubily spun that way simply becuase it does not literally mean that and is factually incorrect.
And the disclaimer/footnote specifically refers to anyone thinking scaff actually holds that point of view... I never made any such claim or even close.
Scaff
Note - Once again I repeat this is not what I believe, simply showing it can still be spun if you want. I fully reserve the right to mercilessly mock anyone who claims this is what I believe.
And the footnote in no way makes any claim about this being outside the realm of the debate, it merely claims it is not scaffs personal viewpoint and he reserves the right to mock anyone who thinks it does.
I don't even have to read meaning into that... it literally is what/all it says.
If I am being threatened with a ban or something for not agreeing with a moderator, then maybe that's how the site is run, but that goes counter to what I have seen over the years. I am putting forth valid and rational argument in a calm reasonable manner to rebut the previous claim. If that's not acceptable forum use, I don't really know what is...
đź’ˇ
:
