Jürgen wrote:
Examples: pretty much any power metal band, most BM (although the situation with BM was worse in the 90's, when every other kid with a guitar started playing BM), most DM and so on...
I think Rhapsody, Dimmu Borgir and Cannibal Corpse suck, but they're all still metal.
Metal is a genre of music, not a sign of quality.
The "as usual"-bit meant that you often seem to ignore other's arguments and repeat your own arguments ad nauseam when debating. But i quess that's just your style.

Many would disagree with you, that's your opinion, not fact. As I said before, food is rubbish.
I'm not ignoring them, I'm arguing by presenting them differently, which people aren't intelligent enough to understand. It's like the retard living down the road, you show friendliness but inside you want to push him over and stamp on his face. Obviously, the retard in this situation is you, dear Jurgen. And maybe you'll accept this as a metaphorical push-face-stomp, and not present opinion as fact.
Opinion : Rhapsody, Cannibal Corpse and Dimmu Borgir suck
Fact: The earth goes round the sun.
See the difference? Good. Now, you see why am I am presenting the argument that I present? Ah, we're getting there. A picture, for you to rest your eyes upon and give your weary brain time to recover from the physical trauma it has just been put through:
Back to the intellectual debate. Metal is indeed a genre of music, full points there, yet I would argue it is often a sign of quality as well. Hypothetical situation: you can listen to a nameless heavy metal band, or some Ashleeeeee Simpson. Which do you choose?
Obviously, the nameless HM band. Accepting that most modern music is of the Ashleeeeee Simpson variety, metal can therefore be seen as a mark of quality.
An acceptable argument? Note that I haven't repeated myself, but have constructed a *new* argument!