
Originally Posted by
Vstarstruck
k, I am irradiated, irritated enough to explain my full thought process, thinking it was obvious you can pick up on it. I do not know how long this will be, but your reply should really give us insights what your true objective is.
I do not know if your objective is trying to start a flame war, like this was pointing out:
Or if you can't see what you are truly saying behind your words. I will assume this though. If you where a troll and a smart one at that, you would start to back off after seeing this. The reason is because now with people having this in their mind, you might wanna take a safe route and not have these thoughts to be pinned on you. Given this I am going to skip explaining what I think about all the reasons you may be trolling and go to the the idea you simply can't see outside your point of view.
See this first post I quoted from you has the line "So I guess that's why you also used the same "proof" when we were discussing about the MSQ roulette..." You should know by know I would reply to such things with the fallacy it is, or where you hoping I would fall in your trap, trying to defend myself in what I said about the MSQ? Did you have replies in your mind on what you might say after I said this? When I talk to people, especially a debate, I am thinking in my head possible replies I may get so I can form my replies to them. So here I am thinking about different possibilities what the person might say. The side effect of doing this is gaining the ability to try to see things from different view points. So I try to understand what people think, however even with all that, I only see 2 reasons for you to be posting such things. 1 is trying to stawman me, so I go off track, then defeat my ultimately by concluding I am not to be debated with, much like your support to one of Divinemights' posts. This also could of been a warning to you, showing I am willing to pick apart and explain in full details like I did with that post. So now you see how much information one can draw with a one line sentence of
"So I guess that's why you also used the same "proof" when we were discussing about the MSQ roulette..."
the point in explaining this goes back to this one warning already:
You really can't see your ultimate point here is to "silence" people that dislike it? Or maybe you have a personal vendetta against me? I usually keep such ideas from public posting, but more as mind game play mapping all possibility I see for your words and actions. At the end of the day when you try bring up an offtopic point (how I acted in MSQ roulette debates) is only there to attempt to silence me, and yet you try to state you do no such thing.
So I need to ask, do you simply do not see what you are truly saying behind your words? In the end "So I guess that's why you also used the same "proof" when we were discussing about the MSQ roulette" does not belong here. Maybe you just said this out of impulse, not thinking what you are truly saying. I advice to take your time and think what you are truly saying in the future, and try to see things outside your prospective. I reply fast at times because I do plan what someone may say based what I say, so it is possible this was out of impulse if you have no experience in doing such a thing.
TLDR version: Saying an off subject reply of "So I guess that's why you also used the same "proof" when we were discussing about the MSQ roulette." is in conflict with "Again, I have nothing against your dislikes...please, give me one quote where I tried to convince you that you should like Eureka. " I guess in a way I did point out that one quote you asked for, but overall it is how you are speaking in general and not limited to literally saying "I dislike your likes and you should stop speaking"