Talk:Lulu/@comment-26420279-20160905085020/@comment-4091261-20160908050138

Oh, the argument was not towards, "pretty decent adc?" I was sure it was since the original claim was that all these premises imply is a pretty decent adc.

I mean, a decent ADC to someone can be as powerful as the product of, , and  ratios. Is as powerful as  in these terms? Nope? Well all those initial premises are true, right? Well I guess the argument is invalid in that person's opinion. This is the nature of the issue.

In this case, correct me if I am wrong, I think Nazareadain believes a "pretty decent adc" must be an effective one. This is not really a far-fetched claim at all. If it's possible that the slow,, mobility, shield, and ultimate is true while is not an effective ADC, then there is logical reason for concern. It is this primal issue I am addressing. Q.E.D.

Since the effectiveness is the concern, I delivered an option that handles the concerns of her effectiveness. By taking an approach of proving that can be an effective ADC through additional premises is attempting to make amends for the invalidity of the initial argument, that having that slow,, mobility, shield, and ultimate is good enough in regards of effectiveness. This is not an issue of conviction against Yustus' point, it's a matter of convincing of Greyr's point.