[SPOILERS] Minfillia' Fate in 3.2

[Fenral]

snip

*faceplam*

You still don't understand my point. Instead of contributing your own ideas, you consistently chose instead to suggest we discuss other things by attempting to invalidate a theory you didn't agree with. That's the issue I have with your "suggestion." A better choice there, since it was a stale thread anyway, would have been to simply elaborate on an alternative scenario yourself instead of waiting for someone else to find one for you. I've seen your posts in the crackpot thread, so I know you're capable of it. So please, stop trying to justify your feelings of victimization and hit us with something.

[Berethos]

*faceplam*

You still don't understand my point. Instead of contributing your own ideas, you consistently chose instead to suggest wediscuss other things by attempting to invalidate a theory you didn't agree with. That's the issue I have with your "suggestion." A better choice there, since it was a stale thread anyway, would have been to simply elaborate on an alternative scenario yourself instead of waiting for someone else to find one for you. I've seen your posts in the crackpot thread, so I know you're capable of it. So please, stop trying to justify your feelings of victimization and hit us with something.

Second post of mine that I quoted has not one, but two such ideas built into it, so you're flat out wrong about me just sitting around waiting for others to come up with ideas. Not that anyone actually responded to those, but they are still sitting there, plain as day to see.

I then tried again in my own post, number 192, specifically calling out that I was trying to kickstart that discussion again. That was also ignored in favor of the same old discussion, at which point I posted about giving up the debate because I was frustrated after those attempts to encourage and help shift the discussion (by both asking others to, and clearly adding my own ideas).

As for invalidating a theory I didn't agree with? I was pointing out that the thread was treating something like it was 100% fact, nothing more and nothing less, and suggesting that we (all of us, myself included) look to other theories that didn't use that one conclusion. Your only response to that was the dismissive response (number 182, specifically), and then a mic-drop style post in the style of "here's a quote, and I'm walking away." It was only when I responded to that post that you seemed interested in a discussion...which wasn't about new ideas, only the same old debate about sacrifice.

So I'm simply not sure how you've reached your version of the discussion, since my actual posts don't support that.

[Fenral]

So I'm simply not sure how you've reached your version of the discussion, since my actual posts don't support that.

Yes, I did see those, but you used them to segue back into the current topic you didn't actually want to discuss, hence the larger idea of the post as a whole is taken as continuing that topic you didn't actually want to discuss. This is how composition works. You're not the victim and I'm not the bad guy, you just let yourself get swept into a debate you didn't want to start. Kind of like I'm doing right now. Please just drop it, and maybe get started elaborating on one of these ideas I'm suppressing with my evil, inflexible ways. Do I need to go back and count the number of open invitations you've turned down at this point?