Originally Posted by
SargeTheSeagull
The irony.
How is that "irony"?
I actually DO try to stick with topics. When I'm attacked, I will answer those attacks. But how is that "ironic" to me pointing out the people making unprovoked digs at me that aren't related to the topic at all? For that to be ironic, I'd have to be making posts digging at people unprovoked and not addressing in any way the topic of the posts at all.
I tend not to do that.
I either am talking about the post, or if I'm attacked, I'm defending my positions. Even here, I made a post about the topic of the thread, and people challenged that. The arguments I offered clarification or rebuttal, and continued talking about the topic. Believe it or not, I don't generally go out of my way to take digs at people. As many and as long as my posts are, notice how you never see me posting just "It's not helping yourself to..." type posts. In fact, I'm not sure I ever do that other than a few months back when Twin was heckling me incessantly along with Titan so I made a few posts in kind, but those were still not unprovoked (they came after me writing long posts trying to counter their arguments that were met with the equivalent of "u mad bro?!")
Even in THAT post, it was a defense/response. Notice I haven't made any post where I just took an argument Saraide was making and replied with an attack on her with no context out of the blue with not even mention of the topic at hand critiquing her and her posting style. In fact, I don't think I've done that once, so you probably can't find a single example of it.
Not to mention it's EXCEEDINGLY rare that I quote/respond to someone and don't - at length - address their arguments, often point by point. You really would have to look hard to find a case of me just dissing someone who was contributing to discussion and making arguments. You will, however, find AMPLE examples of me addressing their points. At length. At
great length. I'm quite aware of my own verbosity. I don't do mic drops, generally speaking, and not as stand alone posts that are just that and nothing more, and never that unprovoked.
Lots of words to say:
Not very "ironic" at all, actually.
Originally Posted by
IDontPetLalas
So Ren
Couple of points
...you don't know much about what I've done in life. I won't bore you with the details, but don't assume you have experience that other people do not. Regardless, it's not really relevant and is a general principle applied to Humans as a whole (politics, society, etc also function on "resist change" but "not all change is good change"). It's not "condescending". When someone uses an argument that people resist good change, it's fair to point out they also resist bad change. This kind of argument is akin to the riddle of the two doors with two guardians where one only tells lies and the other only truths. Or in game theory, the "Prisoner's Dilemma".
The point is, people tend to use arguments that both support AND oppose their position but only present the one side. It's fair - not "condescending" - to point out the other side of that double-edged sword. If you don't use it as an argument, I won't point out it has another edge. If you do use it as an argument, the proper rebuttal IS to point out that it applies equally for and against your argument. The onus is on you to prove the specific change in question is good, not to point out that people resist good change. If you can prove the change is good, then whether people resist change (good or bad) is irrelevant and shouldn't even be brought up since it isn't relevant if you've already proven that the change is good.
So it wasn't condescending and it wasn't twisting your words. It was a rebuttal.
.
As to the designer - we know they have designers for various things. The game wouldn't exist if there were NO designers. They have 4 Job designers, and even if we assume they're all focused on DPS, there have been a lot of bad DPS Jobs, rotations, tuning, reworks, etc. While it's true that having designers should reduce the incidences of that, it doesn't guarantee it.
.
As to "corrupt a wish" - it's not an obscure reference, but yes, it's similar to monkey's paw (corrupt a wish was actually the one I encountered in life first). And not to be condescending, but...if you don't know or aren't familiar with a term, why not just say "I'm not familiar with that term, what does it mean?" or google it? Why come hard against someone for using a term...you...aren't even familiar with the meaning of and don't know if they're using it correctly or not?
And you quote that last sentence, yet that's what you did here - not understand a thing, and instead of asking to try and understand it, lashing out at the person in ignorance, not even knowing what exactly it was you weren't agreeing with them on. That's not bad faith on my part, that's literally stating what you did. I'll try to refrain from pointing out the literal thing you're doing if that makes you feel bad, though I'd say the better thing would be to not do such things in the first place. It'd also be nice if you didn't accuse me of things (being condescending, etc) while also saying you aren't inventing things I didn't say. I DIDN'T say anything condescending. The condescension was invented on your part. I know you don't like me and that flavors how you read what I write, but you're reading in things (tone and intent) that aren't there. That is invention.
I've said it before and I'm sure this won't be the last time, but a LOT of your attacks against me are based on things you
interpret in my posts that aren't there rather than what I say. You often supply quotes to substantiate your view, yet the quotes don't ever seem to actually say what you say they say. So the issue seems to be what you're reading into my statements, not what my statements are themselves.
Reply With Quote
