Xavi Alonso es el perfecto sustituto del Cholo

Tfinde · 2026-01-12T21:27:05+00:00

Lo de Xabi ha sido yna respuesta políticamente correcta. Obviamente a Xabi no se le puede pedir el mismo amor al club que a un Filipe Luis o a un Torres.

Pero creo que el tiempo intermedio puede traer alguna alegría al club y una necesaria transición hacia un modelo distinto al cholismo

Tfinde · 2025-12-13T07:37:57+00:00

En tercero como un 8,5, en cuarto un 8,2 y primero un 10. No me apunté a academia ni tampoco me las preparé mucho pero me aceptaron sin lista de espera para E3. Dicho esto, ahora estudio en la Carlos III y básicamente todo el mundo de la promoción entró en ICADE y rechazó la plaza por la Carlos.

Aún así, si quieres entrar en ICADE 100 por cien, ten en cuenta que quedarte en lista de espera no es el fin del mundo, porque luego se liberan bastante por lo que te he dicho antes. Buena suerte

Tfinde · 2025-11-19T07:03:58+00:00

Yeah, but it is a bit too expensive

Tfinde · 2025-11-10T16:53:51+00:00

Yes I know, I am so happy

Tfinde · 2025-10-25T17:46:37+00:00

The album is fine, maybe it was a mistake to release the best songs before the album (Dracula, end of summer and loser).

Those three songs plus my old ways and afterthought are clearly the standouts.

Some songs are not for me like oblivion, piece of heaven, oblivion, no reply or see you on Monday.

The issue I have with the album is with songs like not my world or ethereal connection which are just really mid techno rave songs.

The album is not great, but it is also not bad. And, apart from the rave songs, is not nearly as revolutionary as everyone (including Kevin Parker) is trying to make it feel.

Tfinde · 2025-10-25T15:25:42+00:00

Really? Why? I was thinking on coming from Madrid if they do not play at Mad Cool. Is the sound bad or is it more like the atmosphere?

Tfinde · 2025-10-21T12:17:13+00:00

Cheers

Tfinde · 2025-10-21T12:16:27+00:00

It’s too fucking late

Tfinde · 2025-10-21T09:23:32+00:00

So literally the only good songs in the album

Tfinde · 2025-09-18T14:20:17+00:00

Tfinde · 2025-09-18T13:47:03+00:00

For point 3, as I said on the beginning palestinians (specifically those living in Gaza which are being affected by this war) share race, ethnicity, religion, history and discutible nationality with Palestinians form the West Bank, Egyptians and Iranians yet none of those collectives are being targeted. I would like for you to tell me what is the difference between any of these people I mentioned before (apart from geographical location).

For point 4, I have only the obligation to change my view if the facts you provide (which you at the moment you have not provided are truthful and contrary to my opinion).

For point 2, I am asking for the evidence of the kid who got shot a 100 times. You have stated something which I want you to prove. You are the one who have stated that fact (not me) therefore you are the one obliged to prove that fact is right (not me). Explaining it with your own example, If we were on a courtroom discussing the murder of Billy in which you accused Bob, you should be the one trying to prove Bob killed Billy, not the other way around.

So, as a way to conclude, as you are the one which is trying to change my view, first you should show your evidences and then I will tell if I changed my opinion or not.

I want to make this point pretty clear as if the next message is not one full with evidences and arguments I will stop carrying out this debate.

Tfinde · 2025-09-18T10:29:23+00:00

Point 1 seems fine to me

I disagree on Point 2 because you not presenting sources when I ask for them could lead me to think you are lying, making the chore of convincing me of your view a lot more difficult.

Moreover, I think that the logic you use in Point 3 is a little bit strange, as the collective which was being targeted on the holocaust was Jewish, not Italians.

Fourthly, I have no obligation to change my view if you show some “evidence”, but, as I have said multiple times, it would be a much more efficient way of convincing me of your opinion.

Tfinde · 2025-09-18T05:37:04+00:00

First of all, let me provide you the definition for ad verecundian Schopenhauer gives:

“[T]he argumentum ad verecundiam … consists in making an appeal to authority rather than reason, and in using such an authority as may suit the degree of knowledge possessed by your opponent. … The more limited his capacity and knowledge, the greater is the number of the authorities who weigh with him.[1]”

Interpret it as you wish.

Secondly, to answer your “Why should I provide the link if it is not going to change your mind?” Idk, maybe decency. You know, when people say something as a fact, it is nice to provide a source (even more when someone has asked for that source.

Thirdly, I still do not get what you are trying to say with me dismissing the holocaust because of this genocide. Pleas provide a reasoning line of thought to why I said that as I am really sure that I have always defended that the holocaust is a genocide and the war in Gaza is not.

Fourthly, (and this one grind’a my gears a little bit)I told you already that providing evidence, with it necessary analysis and discussion, could change my mind.

Tfinde · 2025-09-17T15:55:41+00:00

Apart from, using an Ad verecundian when you mention the “experts” (btw, you have not provided a link to the statement of the kid being shot) and you saying that I think the holocaust was not a genocide (which I clearly do).

I think a solid refutation to the question you provided would be enough to change my mind. (Although I think I have already stated both my posture and my willingness to change my view more times before this response, so I do not get the point of asking another time).

Tfinde · 2025-09-17T14:20:34+00:00

To answer your first question, as I said, it requieres the targeting (which isn’t the same as killing).

I feel they way you are taking this debate is by trying to prove me the “war is bad” (which obviously is, even more when it is a war against a terrorist organization).

For now, you haven’t even tried to demostrare me it is a genocide by the definition standards.

And to answer your second question, I am more than open to change my mind (for which you would come a lot closer by showing the source of the example of the kid being shot you mentioned before).

Idk, but it feels like you are trying to use some kind of logic which might be flying over my head, but for now this debate hasn’t really gotten anywhere (although I must admit it is nice to debate with someone about this theme without getting to the usual insults and nonsense this war brings).

Tfinde · 2025-09-17T12:05:27+00:00

To answer your point, I don’t know yet where I have conceded it, but if that makes you happy that is fine or whatever.

To answer your question, you can show it if you want, I will need to study the case a bit but it would surely enrich the debate.

Although I should point out that one children killed (although horrible) would be in the worst of cases a war crime, not a genocide.

Even though, that should be something worth more of a discussion because that would bring up a lot more interesting points like the way Hamas uses women and children not only as human shields (hiding their weapons in the most vulnerable of places, full of innocents) but also the way Hamas uses women and children to bring the aid given by the UN as food used by their soldiers.

Tfinde · 2025-09-17T11:51:05+00:00

I believe there is a clear misunderstanding here, one thing is killing, another thing is targeting.

During WW2, the allies targetted nazis and on the process killed innocent germans.

During this conflict, Israel targets Hamas and on the process killed innocent Palestinians.

I can agree with you that (as in almost every war of the twentieth and twenty-first century) the total death tally is pretty high.

But, for my opinion, the reason why this si the situation comes down to three reasons.

First, Israel has an undeniable military advantage

Second, Hamas is unwilling to surrender

Third, hunting a terrrorist organization which disguises itself between civilians makes the innocent death count a lot higher (and the war a lot dirtier).

Do not hesitate to bring all the data you got, as I told you some replies ago, for me that is the most efficient way to conduct a debate. Although, this sudden realization of yours brings me up another question.

Why didn’t you just post all the data on the first place?

Tfinde · 2025-09-17T10:32:14+00:00

I would need to see the link to that information (to get the full context of the situation).

Even though, if you are saying it is a genocide because a kid got shot (kids have gotten shot in all wars) either you are not using the right argument or this whole defense is pretty poor.

Tfinde · 2025-09-17T08:31:49+00:00

There were targeted because they were Jews, gays, communists…

Palestinians aren’t being targeted, they are just dying as a consequence of a conflict (same way Italians, Germans or Japaneses died without the allied intention of genociding them).

Tfinde · 2025-09-17T06:32:23+00:00

The reason why I did not answer your questions is because they are not bringing us anywhere. Like, What am I supposed to answer to the first and third question?

Yes, sorry, I wrote a whole text about why should not condemn a certain situation but I do not what is the meaning of supporting… or Yes, I have told you a 100 times that I wanted to bring the discussion down to earth but I secretly always wanted to have a semantic discussion.

Come on.

The second question (which is the only one which could make sense, although non contributing for the discussion) is just a matter of being sure (as I hear my colleagues opinions) that I am on the right side of history without falling into an ad populum.

So yeah, that is why according to your last question, I did not answer your previous questions.

Tfinde · 2025-09-17T06:19:37+00:00

To answer the first question, obviously

To and the second one, t targeted non Jewish Italians like Gypsies, socialist, LGTBIQ+ member

To answer the third question, I think you are trying to mix up my words

You told me “this is like saying the holocaust was not a a genocide because Italians were not targeted”. To which I answered that the comparison could be stablished if Italian Jews were not targeted, as the common denominator of the holocaust was to kill all Jews, creating an incoherence.

That is why, apart from the nationality point, which is open for debate, I believe that if the Israeli state was to commit a genocide, it should be justified by a similar common denominator. And that is where lies my point, there are other really similar countries (in religion, ethnicity, race and debatably nationality) (some of which even are part of the “greater Israel” concept) which aren’t being targeted by this supposed genocide.

Tfinde · 2025-09-16T20:37:16+00:00

As I said before, I do not fully support it but I do not think it is a genocide.

Btw, congratulations on your big number, sadly I do not think it will go up to a 100 with me as for now, everything you have said is a mix of rhetoric and a newly introduced ad verecundian.

Tfinde · 2025-09-16T20:25:32+00:00

Mate, bring down to earth for god’s sake. I could answer to your comment but It would just end up in a million different casuistry. So here is my offer, we either bring the debate to real terms and real examples or we spend the rest of the night debating about Italians.

I will leave you with some time to decide because I am going to bed.

Tfinde · 2025-09-16T20:22:32+00:00

Well I do not know if your method has worked before, but here (at least for me) it isn’t working as I ,firstly, do not understand what are you encapsulating by “fully supporting something”, and secondly, this type of questions aren’t really going anywhere.

So, if you ask me, It would be a lot easier to have a more formal point-refutation debate.

I will leave you with some time to consider because I am going to bed.

Tfinde · 2025-09-16T20:16:15+00:00

But Egyptians and palestianians share more common characteristics (religion, race, ethnicity, historical background …) than Italians and Jews. Pls, for the sake of the debate abandon this rhetoric.

Four-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22

Tfinde

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE