Misleading "Pumpkin Wheelbarrow"

[BlackandWhite]

It's unnecessary because it's misleading. To everyone. therefore your arguement would lose anyways.

The point that I am coming from is, that since Tempus responded to Nizz’s contention, (that the pumpkin wheelbarrow has a misleading description), with, “Maybe it was done on purpose?” followed by, “Maybe they as in the staff made the item as in the description and the name specifically like that for a reason,” it would suggest he believes it was purposefully designed to not interact with the pumpkin activity, with the conclusion that this intent negates mislead.

However, I believe this reasoning does not logically follow due to the fact that intentions and mislead are mutually exclusive. Which, even if the wheelbarrow was designed to behave in such manner, it is still nonetheless misleading that an item described as being able to, "Carry all your pumpkins in this wheelbarrow!", only actually serving nothing more than a toy.

Lets take the example of fake pockets, even if it was designed in such manner to purposefully and specifically fulfil some sort of artistic capacity, it is still, nonetheless, misleading in how it subverts visual expectations.

If Tempus wishes to argue that the pumpkin wheelbarrow is in fact not misleading, he requires additional premises; a non sequitur reasoning should not been seen as acceptable.

Now to directly address what you said, Tanman, I fail to see how my arguments are misleading; considering the fact I have provided reasoning and even an example. If you are just going to throw around statements that, “[I am] only here to start an argument,” my words are, “not necessary,” and, “misleading,”, and yet not back your claims with any real substance, I am only left here laughing.

- - - Updated - - -

@Tanman
1. Why do you think I am, "only here to start an arguement."
2. Why are my words, "not necessary".
2A If, "not necessary," because my words are misleading, then how are my words misleading.