Home   |   Browse       NEW: (hypothetically starring) VIC REEVES as LUKE SKYWALKER .. in "Waiting for Godot, the hollywood version".

How to make grid points.   Share:  
Thrust of argument: In the first box make your point and give a clear example which you could present to a jury, citing the name of the source if appropriate. Or present what your opponent would present to a jury. Direction of resistance / implied resistance: Then present the mainstream and/or any other appropriate attack you or your opponent (accordingly) will have to face (you are convincing people, you must prepare them for the fight).

 

I WOULD TRADE NOW ON:
bae (at half strength)
AT APPROX 552.50 capita (at half strength)
AT APPROX 465.90 centrica AT APPROX 144.80 g4s AT APPROX 252.60 gkn AT APPROX 300.80 glencore AT APPROX 349.00 m&s AT APPROX 310.60 morrison AT APPROX 211.80 rollsroyce (at half strength)
AT APPROX 832.50 rsa (at half strength)
AT APPROX 597.00

THIS IS NOT TRADING ADVICE. CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS.

 

Enter your DOMAIN NAME to
collect this point:

 

Removal of resistance: Then clearly show why that attack is weak and what makes it fail. Or if the initial point is your opponent's then explain how they would rebut your attack and what the error of doing so is. Unification: Finally say something which attacks neither side, which both sides would find it impossible to refute and which leads us closer to resolving the problem which it is all a part of.
Rebut this point   Support this point   Edit this point

(TVhobo's estimated size of readership since 2013, mainly in the UK and USA, with Germany in third place:
over 200,000 readers across approximately 200 cities/towns

 

Copy/paste point into your work:

Type: Open statement

1 versions:

1. Server time: 19:6:42 on 1/2/2014

Related points:

References:

 

 

previous point on the grid   |   next point on the grid

 

Click here to read about Shams Pirani, the editor and chief author on this grid - note, if you can actually prove anything written above wrong, I would gladly, if the proof is sufficient, correct what I've written and what I think - if I could, however, prove your attempted proof wrong, then I would accordingly say so and maintain whatever point of view is completely based on fact and proof.