So just as one example of how much bafflingly-unintelligent hot-air these melodramatic responses are, just take this snippet from Sfia:
(Slightly-distorted in sections, because I'm not taking time out of my day to actually transcribe this manually, just pulling it from YouTube Auto-CC)
—————————————————
(*
looks at actual content of Healer Strike Thread and the back-and-forth conversations and summaries there*)
(
*sees all of these exact points addressed, directly, over and over again*)
(
*sees scores of Healers clearly-stating that the Xenos Media Tour stunt was just another straw on the camel's back, and not the sole issue in and of itself, but rather a succinct manifestation of many overall problems*)
...Right, so let me get this straight.
Sfia's an educated and obviously-intelligent man, clearly capable of understanding this if he wanted to, or attempted to. But he obviously didn't.
So if I'm understanding this correctly:
- Gemina's displeasure with her experience as Healer in what used to be "casual challenge" content is being derided as invalid, because she hasn't surveyed the entire game's spectrum of possible experiences.
- 4 slouching dudes in gaming chairs's displeasure with the Healer protest should be accepted as valid, despite the fact that they haven't even bothered to survey the entire thread's spectrum of arguments and explanations, or even understand what's actually being said.
So, uhm, which is it?
Someone needs to fully-explore and engage with something before they can be accepted as validly criticising it?
Or it's actually okay to just skim the surface to save time, and then righteously go-off as if you fully-understand it?