Thread: The Reasoning behind The Sundering? (*6.0 Endwalker Spoilers*)

Originally Posted by Absimiliard

...

To be honest, I'm not even sure who your 'association', as you put it, is fighting against. Sure, there are people here who found Venat's character interesting on passing glance, but that's hardly surprising. I don't think there's a second 'faction' here. You're just shouting obscenities at assorted bystanders, and it's stifling discussion on other topics.

I'm not sure what happened in your conversations about the Garleans, nor does it sound like most of the people currently involved in these forums do either. I'm not really sure what the relevance to the current discussion is. It's worth noting that SE has a support center for addressing prohibited activities under the ToS, and it sounds like you should take up your issues there, rather than in this topic. Whatever it is, though, I don't think that it can be used as a justification for your collective behavior.

Originally Posted by Lyth

To be honest, I'm not even sure who your 'association', as you put it, is fighting against. Sure, there are people here who found Venat's character interesting on passing glance, but that's hardly surprising. I don't think there's a second 'faction' here. You're just shouting obscenities at assorted bystanders, and it's stifling discussion on other topics.

I'm not sure what happened in your conversations about the Garleans, nor does it sound like most of the people currently involved in these forums do either. I'm not really sure what the relevance to the current discussion is. It's worth noting that SE has a support center for addressing prohibited activities under the ToS, and it sounds like you should take up your issues there, rather than in this topic. Whatever it is, though, I don't think that it can be used as a justification for your collective behavior.

Based on your logic i can simply say there are no factions period then. Just people who find the ancients interesting at a “passing glance” and people who find venat interesting at a “passing glance.” What he’s saying has relevance because people thought it fit to derail this discussion by saying things like “ignore this poster” or “this is why we can’t have a good discussion etc etc.” What exactly do you mean by collective behavior by the way?I dont think theres anything stifling discussion more than trying to gatekeep specific posters from discussing things and being passive aggressive in said discussions.