Damn dude. 4 posts this time? When are we going to have you post a page worth. In fact i read something twice in one of them. As per normal i shall just pick out one point in your post that really needs addressing.Quote Cyanide replied effectively saying I don't look before I call out "glitch." He said, "There is invulnerability in the base common1.cns during the getup state and it lasts for 5 ticks afterward. Other people may change this. Please go and LOOK before calling it a glitch, even then, it's probably not a glitch."*Here's where it gets juicy*You said and i quote innaccurately. That mugen has the glitch. This was possibly a misunderstanding by both of us but that's somewhat beside the point. You cannot call something a MUGEN glitch unless you can replicate it over 4 disparate characters.@POTS: I saw it in my sonic game when someone brought it up. I then tried it vs a yuri i had and got the same effect. Could be mugen version though. I don't have mugen+ for eg and i don't really use the hires ones. I haven't tried again since then. I'll do so and scrap that comment if it doesn't reoccur. And i only remember trying vs yuri, i probably tried vs a few other people.
Alright. I'll take a jab at whats going on from my perspective.basicly hjk and Baiken are fighting over on how someone should take stuff said over the intenret basicly and the side arguement being weather or not a video shows a overall bug in MUGEN, which leads to a known bugs arguement overall threw the "whos who of MUGEN".basicly taken from smaller argyement post and bigger bolded letter/font post.Do you two really care this much to argue it over and over? To the point one guys going 3 replys to each other reply in this thread?Seriously, this is freaking INSANE. I know there have been what seems to be bigger arguements, but personaly for me this tops alot of stuff.tl;dr FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCK KKKKK
Quote@POTS: I saw it in my sonic game when someone brought it up. I then tried it vs a yuri i had and got the same effect. Could be mugen version though. I don't have mugen+ for eg and i don't really use the hires ones. I haven't tried again since then. I'll do so and scrap that comment if it doesn't reoccur. And i only remember trying vs yuri, i probably tried vs a few other people.Scratch that, my previous whatsit was innaccurate.It does have an effect. But only on default mugen AI. Not custom.If you've got anything. Head into training mode. Hold down start and set p2 to AI while still holding down start. In mine, they walk at me and jump when i do, but don't attack even if i do. Release start, and AI acts normally from that point on. Works in Arcade too. If you hold start from state 5900 you'll get p2 acting rather oddly.
Cyanide said, May 23, 2008, 05:21:52 amDamn dude. 4 posts this time? When are we going to have you post a page worth. In fact i read something twice in one of them. As per normal i shall just pick out one point in your post that really needs addressing.Quote Cyanide replied effectively saying I don't look before I call out "glitch." He said, "There is invulnerability in the base common1.cns during the getup state and it lasts for 5 ticks afterward. Other people may change this. Please go and LOOK before calling it a glitch, even then, it's probably not a glitch."*Here's where it gets juicy*You said and i quote innaccurately. That mugen has the glitch.I don't quite understand what you were trying to say here. Were you saying, my interpretation of your quote was innacurate, or were you saying that me calling out "glitch" was inaccurate. I may be confused because of the punctuation here (I know I’m bad with that too, but I’m just saying I'm confused :-/)If the first is correct then, I must confess, I did believe there was a subliminal message involved with your post and I ended up replying on that point. Either way, it is very similar to the replies that I normally get, but just teh suggestion taht I did not read, situationally or full circle, would have made me reply in the same way, because it wasn't only you I was replying to, but to everyone who may in the future answer me with the obvious (That may come off a lot more arrogant than I intend for it to. I just lack teh time to change it).Cyanide said, May 23, 2008, 05:21:52 amThis was possibly a misunderstanding by both of us but that's somewhat beside the point. You cannot call something a MUGEN glitch unless you can replicate it over 4 disparate characters.With the other glitches I replicated it in every single char in my MugenSelect (coming from tons of different authors), but with this one it comes from two authors (one not in the video), who code in some rather complex stuff, but I’ll make sure that this is verifiable and test with some more. I’m keeping an open mind, and I’ll accept I’m wrong if I fail to see the glitch repeated (don’t worry, I’ll make sure the authors aren’t similar coders)BTW did you see the top of this reply?http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg683572#msg683572
Quoteyou just absolutely refuse to develop that certain discipline to ask people what they mean, before you postAsk what I had no reason to ask you anything. You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling. I ask when something is ambiguous. This wasn't the case.QuoteEither way, it turns out that when you started to post BIG, you stumbled right into why I posted BIG in tehe frst place on your own:Yes. The difference between you and me is that I pointed out what I was doing, to prevent people from misunderstanding me. Which you don't do, which is [one of] the reason you suck so much at explaining yourself.Quote(Actually answer this, this time) Tell me with your acknowledgement that people have more than one single motive for posting in BIG, why did you automatically subject me to the negative one, instead of weighing everything out?I've already answered : I had no reason to ask. There was no ambiguity.QuoteNo one has ever accused me of yelling before, because everyone understood in the past that I had a terrible post style as a whole..That's just false. No one said you [looked like you] were yelling because nobody is like me. That's a good thing, but anyway, that's what it is. That doesn't make what I say false.Quoteyou knew that, you said that, and you still hastily jumped to a conclusion that was wrong.Because you suck at communication.Quote- Give me one situation where before someone accused me of yelling at them.Nobody saying anything doesn't mean nobody thinks anything.Quote- Actually, let me further that; give me one person who said I was yelling at them, just to have another person, who wasn't even in the discussion jump in and launch their own accusations.Still unrelated. If your only excuse is that I wasn't nivolved, you're just plain lame. It makes no difference whether I was or not involved when I voiced my opinion.Quote- Had someone, who my post was directed to, actaully told me that I was yelling (like if Cyanide accused me of yelling here) I would have explained to him why I made my text so large.Not what you did. You just blew up and laid out the insults on me. And point out to me where you explain to me you weren't yelling then I still say "you were yelling".Quote- If an outsider in teh conversation came in and said, 'hjk, you 'look like' you're yelling' (an indefinite statement, that accepts taht there is no need for insults), I would have explained why I posted in large text, so they would have understood taht I wasn't yelling.How should I care ? You looked like you were yelling so I assumed you were yelling. I had no reason to say anything else.QuoteThen explain what EXACTLY, what your first two replies, the deleted one, and teh one you came back and posted, were addressing.Is it fine with you if I quote said post ? Well, ignoring the first reply I deleted because THAT'S THE REASON I DELETED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE :Baiken said, May 14, 2008, 02:19:30 amI blame again your complete incapacity at explaining yourself properly. And if you aknowledged that you used the wrong word and fixed it, you're really a goddamn jackass to write like you did in your previous post. Don't tell people to read your posts properly if you can't write properly.By the way, your video doesn't work for me, it goes it a fucked up spee---AND STOP PMING ME, MY EYES WORK FINE THANK YOUSo I wonder, what could I possibly have been saying in this post ? If we go by the actual words I'm using, I'm telling you that you are incapable of explaining yourself properly then I call you a jackass for posting the way you did. So where on Earth do you see anything about the actual glitch thing ?QuoteThat's why I quote your replies in FULL and answer themNo, that's why you just don't understand anything of what my posts say. Also, no, you don't quote and address my replies in full, you leave out my questions and my answers to you. What, are you going to ask for a proof ? How about this :me said:Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.Of course I said "you're yelling". You looked like you were yelling, so I thought you were yelling.There, if you want to quote something, quote THAT.So you replied to the sentence that was just before it but you didn't say anything about that, WHICH IS MY REPLY TO THE QUESTION YOU CLAIM I DIDN'T ANSWER. You quoted it, and you completely dodged it, even though I clearly told you to pay special attention to it. You just went about your bullshit on discipline which has absolutely zero reason to apply. This was my reply to you, and you just spoke about discipline that didn't apply and then afterward you acted like I didn't reply.QuoteIt was never cleared Byakko. That's why I've said, "I've been asking you these two questions FOR A YEAR!!"And I've been answering you for a year. So yes, this was solved and the only thing to blame is your complete inability to communicate properly (both in and out).QuoteI'm asking you that with the facts and details included, do you believe taht it would ahve been reasonable for me to make that conclusionI've answered that more than three times in my previous three replies, and now you claim you read all of my posts and respond to them entirely WHICH YOU REALLY DON'T BY THE WAY...QuoteI've been trying to get you see to see that you could have worded that post a lot better.I've been trying to get you to see that you focused on the wrong thing and that no, you're the one who completely misunderstood, I had no reason to word it any differently.Quote- When you tried to mess up the order of how this thing turned into an argumentYou're just lying. Or you didn't understand, which is probably more likely.Quote- When you tried to equate your words with Cyanide's blatantly ignoring THE STRICT FACT, that Cyanide, actually added in the 'seemed like' elemt of the post where you did notAgain, as Cyanide confirmed, you're the one who's focusing on completely retarded details. It was perfectly normal of me to say it that way and I had no reason to word it any differently.QuoteYou miseed 2 people first of all Wink. Second, of course it matters.I'm telling you it had nothing to do with the point I'm making. I believe I AM the one who decides if it's relevant or not. And I'm telling you it's not.QuoteYou want to present to me that throughout my time here I've posted badly in situations, and I am not allowed to present you with times where you ahve posted badly while not watching your words. It is relevant to MY POINT, which is teh same as yours to me.This wasn't a time where I posted "without watching my words". I had no reason to say it any differently. I don't need a scumbag like you to tell me something I already know about how I make mistakes and how I say wrong things every now and then. Simply, in this case, you're the one who what I was saying and you're the one trying to drag attention over things that are irrelevant.QuoteGive me WHY, it wasn't.I've done so thousands of times already. You knew qwer was there and I didn't, you knew you had no reason to feel targeted by what I was saying even if what I said matched what you did, you knew you should have simply pointed out that qwer did it, and you still picked the wrong reaction. So no, it wasn't fair. You keep telling me I should have asked before opening my mouth about yelling ? Well you should have pointed out that qwer was the one who made the patch back then. You didn't, you acted like my words "could only mean I was accusing you", you acted like my words were ambiguous, which it wasn't the case since I keep telling you I specifically picked my words to NOT say anything more than I wanted to say. My words were not ambiguous, I specifically avoided accusing you. Stop acting like your conclusion was fair, it just wasn't.Quoteyou have ignored teh facts that I've posted, only to say, "No it wasn't."You're either lying or not reading, you pick. I've explained several times why it wasn't, so no, I didn't just say "no it wasn't".QuoteIf you present false facts and state themn as definitesWhich I didn't... And you're going to come back at the "you're yelling" and "you say that to everyone" and I'll reply in advance that you simply have no communication skill whatsoever, you misunderstand what people tell you.Quote(Actually answer this, this time) Tell me with your acknowledgement that people have more than one single motive for posting in BIG, why did you automatically subject me to teh negative one, instead of weighing everything out?I already did several times, you blind moron.QuoteONE POST (YOUR POST) WAS THE ESCALATION POINT AND YOU KNOW IT.One post is not an escalation and you know it. I didn't throw any tantrum, I simply stated my opinion. And you know it.QuoteYou replied back on Cyanide's point (SEE THAT, DON'T LIE), after I had already stated that I changed what I was talking about .Uh, I've never lied about that. The only times I mentionned that was to say that IT'S EXACTLY THE REASON I DELETED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE YOU BLIND BLITHERING IMBECILE.Quoteposted in an insulting manner anyway, accusing me of misspeaking, when it said in my post just before your delted one, PLAIN AS DAY, that the Makoto thing was NOT a wake-up glitch.Okay you're a stupid imbecile. What I said in that post was true then and is still true now, I blame those first posts on your inability to explain yourself properly, and you post like a jackass. I was replying to the post you deleted. I blamed it ("IT" AS IN, THE POST CYANIDE REPLIED TO, NOT YOUR EXPLANATION OF IT) on your inability to explain yourself properly.QuoteHow many people have told you to fucking stop it?I imagine there were less people than those who told you to "stop it".Quotewhereas you have been suggesting you added in the, 'seemed like,' when you blatantly said, 'hjk, you were yelling.'No, I never suggested that I said "seem like" in my very first post. I KNOW I DIDN'T SAY "SEEM LIKE". I'VE STATED SO SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY, WHEN I TOLD YOU IT WAS NORMAL OF ME TO JUST SAY "YOU'RE YELLING" INSTEAD OF "SEEM LIKE". YOU UNDERSTAND "INSTEAD OF" ? IT MEANS I KNOW I DIDN'T SAY IT THE FIRST TIME AROUND. AND UNLIKE YOUR FLAT-OUT LIE, I DIDN'T ACT AS IF I DID. I CORRECTED THAT HERE AND HERE, after which it WASN'T even mentionned until several pages later. You're still incapable of understanding what you're told properly.QuoteThank You, for truly admitting it was wrong.I've never said anything else.Quoteyou did have a reason to ask because, as you know, I have great respect for Cyanide. Secondly, Cyanide didn't insult me, and I don't post insults, unless they're reactionary.hjk, that doesn't change anything. We're not inside your head. Your first post in this topic totally came out as yelling. Even with how much you rever him, you are known for blowing up every time you want to discuss bugs and someone tells you youre not reading the docs. When you post like you did, repeating yourself and increasing the size each time, it's seen as yelling, no matter what you will say, no matter how much you say you worship the one you're talking to. I've told you that, Cyanide told you that.QuoteI'm simply asking you why your [AI Coder] whom you suggest betrayed his word to KFM, matches himself with ME?Because nobody knew there was anyone else with you. You ask if you can make a patch (and I can quite fairly guess you did not point out it wasn't even you who was coding it), then later the patch comes out, so yes, obviously my description would match with you. I've told you that several times, nobody even knew there was anyone other than you, so it was perfectly normal for me to say it like that.QuoteI mean you posted that, before you actually knew the details.I've also told you several times already that I cleared out the details and that those particular details had nothing to do with the point I was making. When a detail is irrelevant with something you're saying, of course you don't even mention that detail.Quotewith a time where you yourself have done so as well.I got that the first time you said it. And I've already said several times that I know I speak wrongly every now and then.QuoteI’ve said everything I’ve intended to and I’ve been understood as well.What ?? In the first post in this topic, is it the case ? Is what this post shows exactly what you mean to say ? This post looks like you are yelling. Is that what you mean to say ?? IS IT ?? No ? Then no, what you are actually posting is not what you mean to say.QuoteAnd by the way, stop adding in the word “think” when you know that;s not what your post said.You're just being retarded. I thought you were yelling, therefore I said "you're yelling". I've said that several times. Did you miss them all ?? Unlike you, my post said exactly what I thought. I thought you were yelling, therefore I said "you are yelling".Quote“When someone looks like they are trying to emphasize something, it's perfectly normal to think he's emphasizing.”Because you don't looke like you're emphasizing. You look like you're yelling. When I said "I'll post in big, maybe you'll see" I looked like I was emphasizing, BECAUSE I SAID I WAS EMPHASIZING. You did not, thus you looked like you were yelling.QuoteYou should have asked instead of presenting it like you knew what went on in the situationNo, I had no reason to ask. You ask when something is ambiguous, not when something seems obvious. Even when this "obvious" is wrong.QuoteIt’s irrelevant to whom, you. It’s relevant to MY POINT, is it not?Because I've already answered that times and times again. My description matched you because-IT WAS NOT THE POINT I WAS MAKING, SO OF COURSE I WAS SKIPPING THE DETAILS-I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT, AND THERE WAS NOTHING THAT COULD HAVE EVEN SUGGESTED ANYONE ELSE WAS INVOLVED.When it was discovered that the Earth was round and revolving around the sun, they didn't add "oh, also we're in a galaxy and there are tons of other galaxies". Because they had no way to know about the other galaxies. And nobody would blame them for not specifying it. Because there was no way they could have known.I'm skipping the rest of your retarded rant where you repeat yourself again and again on stuff I have already replied to times and times again.QuoteAnd the thing also is that YOU DIDN’T WAIT for me to make MY FIRST POST explaining the details, bfore you decided you could “sum things up.”Because I was talking about responsibility, and your detail had zero relevance in it. If you felt targeted, it's THERE that you should have pointed it out instead of acting like you did.QuoteLet’s see:- I post evidence to back up my points- I ask people about their motives for their actions- I apologize when I’m wrong- I falsely apologize even when I believe I don’t believe I’m wrongDoesn't change what I'm saying. When someone is ambiguous, I ask him to be more clear. When someone actually proves me wrong, I apologize.QuoteWhat, Byakko? You ever heard of something called a counter in an argument?Does that change anything to what I said ? You're ignoring my explanations and you don't want me to ignore your so-called "counter arguments".QuoteSo wait, I and others have told you many times to stop jumping in with insults and just post and you refuse? Why?I'm pretty sure I've already replied to that. Also, you STILL have huge problem with communication and you STILL post like a jackass, so my first reply in this topic STILL stands.*skip the things I've alraedy answered*QuoteNo, you DODGED. I don’t have to ask it again.You say I dodged because you don't want to hear my explanations. I say I already replied.*skipping again the things I've already addressed*... Well what do you know, even though there's at least one entire post and a half, if I'm skipping everything I've already answered, I have nothing left to say.
What did you just say??? said, May 21, 2008, 10:59:05 amSepp said, May 20, 2008, 07:51:12 pmP.S. How to Win Friends and Influence People?You're sending thsi to me? I'm not the one who insults people and thinks they won't get offended (and I’m not talking about with me).Besides, I’ve falsely conceded to the guy before, minus the fact that even with you, I tried “to tell you what I thought you wanted to hear [baby].”Don't understand the "besides" sentence.You mean I rather ought to give that to Baiken to read because if anybody of you two would be in need of more influence and friends it would be him?I . . . suggest you start counting friends and gauging your influence. Preferably in your mind only; the next combo-posts might get you banned.P.S. clarifying:Iced said, May 23, 2008, 09:02:52 pmI dunno what you really meant to come across on this post, but you are, at least to me ( Mind that I might be reading it gauging your intentions wrongly) coming across as if you are telling him that Byakko is more important than him and then threatening to ban him over that.sepp: link with advicehjk: for me?!? but baiken is worsesepp: and yet he's got more influence and friends. and stop triple posting or else!!
And you don't really NEED to post 3 times to reply to Baiken. You realise that due to how much of every post you quote, you say the same thing over and over? Say it once.Oh and here's an analogy for your current situation. "There's a person people hate"There, who am i referring to? Is it obvious to anyone?So fucking WHAT if the "ai coders" actions matched up with yours. I released a character. My actions match up with Warusaki3 releasing a character. Does this make me Warusaki3? No. Actions match up all the time. It's called a coincidence. It's certainly not something that people get up tight about.And as i've said. If Baiken hadn't posted it I would have. I'm sure someone else would have because increasing your text gradually like that, does not show emphasis. At all. THIS can show SOME emphasis without being yelling. If you wish to emphasise a whole sentence without shouting. You should post it like this.Please note, i have not repeated myself 4 times in this post while addressing the argument as a whole rather than single lines.
Do as I do and respond to the quotes that need new information, and for everything else, just say "The rest of your post was stupid"
- Byakko, I mus hold my reply to you for later. I don't have the time -Cyanide said, May 24, 2008, 12:11:23 amAnd you don't really NEED to post 3 times to reply to Baiken. You realise that due to how much of every post you quote, you say the same thing over and over? Say it once.Good Post. Sometimes I think about that, but I feel as though I'll be told I'm dodging something.Cyanide said, May 24, 2008, 12:11:23 amOh and here's an analogy for your current situation. "There's a person people hate"There, who am i referring to? Is it obvious to anyone?The thing is, I'm posting exclusively to Byakko, no one else.Cyanide said, May 24, 2008, 12:11:23 amSo fucking WHAT if the "ai coders" actions matched up with yours. I released a character. My actions match up with Warusaki3 releasing a character. Does this make me Warusaki3? No. Actions match up all the time. It's called a coincidence. It's certainly not something that people get up tight about.No, unfortunately. Sometimes when I quote his post from back then, I should have included a "..." I've been addressing these issues separately, because again I know that Byakko will know what I'm talking about. Any outside party (which hasnt't read the topic entirely... for good reason) will be left in the dark because I don't feel the need to post 'to them'These are the details I've addressed- KFM made an initial post accusing me of betraying my word and relesing teh Patch- Later, Laxxe had come in to ask exactly what was going on- Byakko said in reply t Laxxe, "... In this case, [the Yun case that KFM was addresssing] "the [AI Coder] asked the representative of the original creator if he could release the patch. The creator said, "No" and what do you know, the [AI Coder] did it anyway. ... I'm just summing things up"Actually, you can see that here:http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg682009#msg682009The Points that I've made are:- By saying, "In this case," Byakko adds specificity to his post and makes it clear that he is speaking about the same issue that the entire topic was about (key word -> THIS). - Going on, with the knowledge that he said, "In this case," he says the [AI Coder] asked teh representative of teh original creator if he could release teh Patch, and the representative said, "No." Again, that echoed what KFM had said about me, and those actions, matched directly up with mine (keep in mind still that he said, "In this case").- By matching up the actions with mine after saying, "In this case," he had already made his post specific (as in he made it clear he was talking about the Yun case), and because there was absolutely no one else involved who made my same actions, it would have been completely reasonable to say the [AI Coder] (again ebcause of the "In this case") was me.- In the end of the post, he says he, "summing things up." That gives teh suggestion that he knows and understands teh situation, which as it turned ou he did not.- That is why I'm asking my questions, does he believe that given the facts it was reasonable, and why, after saying "in this case" do his [AI Coder's] actions match p with mine.Cyanide said, May 24, 2008, 12:11:23 amAnd as i've said. If Baiken hadn't posted it I would have. I'm sure someone else would have because increasing your text gradually like that, does not show emphasis. At all. THIS can show SOME emphasis without being yelling. If you wish to emphasise a whole sentence without shouting. You should post it like this.And Cyanide, had YOU said it, I wouldn't have gotten offended. The reason for that was because my post did after all come in reply to YOU. Had YOU, the person to whom I replied, said, 'hjk, you were yelling' I would have clarified.There are many times that people who I'm addressing have misinterpretted my post and replied with a definite interpretation, only to have me say something like, "Sorry, I didn't mean to coem off that way you. What I was trying to say was..." There are even time where before anyone posts, I make a note (in teh same post) that my language may have been bad and I will attempt to change it.I've done both of those things even within "this" topic.Cyanide said, May 24, 2008, 12:11:23 amPlease note, i have not repeated myself 4 times in this post while addressing the argument as a whole rather than single lines.*skills*Sepp said, May 23, 2008, 08:48:10 pmYou mean I rather ought to give that to Baiken to read because if anybody of you two would be in need of more influence and friends it would be him?I . . . suggest you start counting friends and gauging your influence.OH Hoh Ho Ho, Sepp. Let's not ignore some major facts:- Byakko has been arund for far longer than I have. As a matter of fact, after that Yun topic, I said I'd quit Mugen, and I stayed away for something like 8 months - Byakko has a High Ranking position in a Forum of moderate popularity (and besides its member count, it's still very well known) whereas I don't have a Forum that I Moderate- Many of the Mods at that Forum who are already his friends, have come here to post (they know him, not me)- I have never spoken to those RS Mods, besides KFM,a nd that goes well everytime - Since my time here, Byakko has been in many more arguments than I have- Byakko, has gained a ton of respect and influence for his creating prowess (a field where I will not deny that he crushes me) which is the gist of what Mugen is about. I don't even have the time to create.- With me not being a Moderator, what do you expect me to do, make random acts of kindness and kiss ass whenever I get the chance, so i can make friends?- We both help out wherever we can, but he has a ton load more experience than I do and is able to help with more things, so naturally he'll have more of an opportunity to help others and get them to like him. Something that i could care less about and have to let go.- There was a tiem where I used to post in a completely submissive manner.- I have shown many time and time again, that I try to be understanding of people, and ask them about their intentions before, amking a judgement- Again, I don't insult people to make my points (maybe in AI topics I'm pretty bad with that though, but I acknowledge it and tend to change my posts). I do, however react badly to insults over the net.- There are 2 arguments which I will gladly accept that I started and that was the one where I posted in teh "RS Awards topic" (I should have been slapped in my head for that), and the Combo Accuracy Topic with potS (I don't think i threw the first insult, But I did waste PotS' time).- I apologize when i'm wrong, and even when i don't believe i am.- BTW, REAL LIFE IS MY SANCTUARY. In RL, an argument with me is so rare because hearing yelling annoys the hell out of me so I just submit as soon as teh volume chnges. Sepp said, May 23, 2008, 08:48:10 pmPreferably in your mind only; the next combo-posts might get you banned.Oh yes, Sepp, I must post to YOU instead of Byakko. Oh yes, that isn't completely ridiculous.And you suggested demoting [E], look at yourself.BTW, read my reply to Bastard Wolf (take into account that Byakko, has posted in the same fashion):http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg683572#msg683572Sepp said, May 23, 2008, 08:48:10 pmP.S. clarifying:Iced said, May 23, 2008, 09:02:52 pmI dunno what you really meant to come across on this post, but you are, at least to me ( Mind that I might be reading it gauging your intentions wrongly) coming across as if you are telling him that Byakko is more important than him and then threatening to ban him over that.sepp: link with advicehjk: for me?!? but baiken is worsesepp: and yet he's got more influence and friends. and stop triple posting or else!!Wy to consider all of teh facts woth that one, bucko.
...Did you even READ what he linked?On the point of the topic with, [E] he had his reasons for wanting to demote [E], I can't say I agree or disagree with them, but they are at the very least good reasons. Also, Hjk, its not how big your weapon is, its how fast you can use it. If you came at me swinging with a ball and chain, and I were to stick a knife in your throat, in the end, I would be unscathed. Remember that for your argument.
o.O Your problem as I see it is this:You posses a high drive for self-expression but sub-par reading comprehension, argumentation, presentation and communication skills.If correct that would be a general problem which---if not addressed---would cause irritation regardless of persons or topics involved. Therefore I'm trying to see what could be done about it.What did you just say??? said, May 24, 2008, 01:48:56 pmSepp said, May 23, 2008, 08:48:10 pmYou mean I rather ought to give that to Baiken to read because if anybody of you two would be in need of more influence and friends it would be him?I . . . suggest you start counting friends and gauging your influence.OH Hoh Ho Ho, Sepp. Let's not ignore some major facts:[...]Look. I say, "Do you mean that XYZ? If so, consider that ABC is how it is."The way to begin an answer to that is either by, "Yes, I meant XYZ." or "No, I meant UIO instead."But you reply, "Do not ignore the facts!!! [long list of reasons for why ABC could be how it is]". . . ??? I know that Baiken has more influence and friends than you do---I brought it up. You don't need to explain possible reasons for that fact to me, calling your reasons facts I am ignoring. My argument is disconnected from why: why is irrelevant to my argument, since it's not based on why. It is merely based on the fact itself, and not on any of those you listed.And I only brought it up because you appeared to be irritated by being the advice target and refuse the advice because Baiken could use it more than you.By my reply, I confirmed that, yes, I was targeting you. And that, no, I did not think it sensible to refuse it by bringing up Baiken---because of ABC: he's your superior in terms of friends count and influence, the title-giving goals of the adivice.Why he's got more than you is irrelevant to my point: I believe you ought to read the advice more than him.QuoteOh yes, Sepp, I must post to YOU instead of Byakko. Oh yes, that isn't completely ridiculous.And you suggested demoting [E], look at yourself.BTW, read my reply to Bastard Wolf (take into account that Byakko, has posted in the same fashion):http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg683572#msg683572??? What's ridiculous? After posting ideas how you could reduce your word count, I now really want you to stop triple posting---using one of the biggest threats available to me to reinforce how seriously I want you to stop it.I read your reply to Bastard Wolf. I don't get what you're saying or don't see its relevance. Are you complaining because I'm posting in this topic and you now also have to reply to me instead of finishing your business replying strictly to Byakko?I suppose mentioning [E] implies you mean I am acting incorrectly? What then, should I do?
QuoteAnd Cyanide, had YOU said it, I wouldn't have gotten offended.Noone else is allowed to correct you if you look like you're doing something rude? You can't enforce that. If you've done something that's not nettiquette you WILL be pulled up on it.That just says grudge against Baiken to me.Quote- That is why I'm asking my questions, does he believe that given the facts it was reasonable, and why, after saying "in this case" do his [AI Coder's] actions match p with mine.Cos it is a FUCKING COINCIDENCE. He didn't name you. He wasn't entirely sure (as he's said) who did it and AVOIDED naming you for that purpose. He didn't want to start precisely what you're doing. After 2 years. He has in fact (once more) accepted that it WASN'T you. Why can't you take his word for it? It's really very petty to keep going on something like this when the other party has taken your word about something and you still want to make his comments all about you.Would you like him to backtrack and start blaming you now?
- Byakko, I still don't have the time to reply -- Just got abck from a track meet (10 hrs, whup tee dee)-Sepp said, May 24, 2008, 09:36:53 pmo.O Your problem as I see it is this:You posses a high drive for self-expression but sub-par reading comprehension, argumentation, presentation and communication skills.Oh Sure... Post thee specific places where you've seen those from me please. I want to see where exactly you're saying that applies to me.Sepp said, May 24, 2008, 09:36:53 pmIf correct that would be a general problem which---if not addressed---would cause irritation regardless of persons or topics involved. Therefore I'm trying to see what could be done about it.*Please Clarify, because I didn't understand.* (and I admitted that instead of lying about it. I have admitted to it many times before.)Sepp said, May 24, 2008, 09:36:53 pmWhat did you just say??? said, May 24, 2008, 01:48:56 pmSepp said, May 23, 2008, 08:48:10 pmYou mean I rather ought to give that to Baiken to read because if anybody of you two would be in need of more influence and friends it would be him?I . . . suggest you start counting friends and gauging your influence.OH Hoh Ho Ho, Sepp. Let's not ignore some major facts:[...]Look. I say, "Do you mean that XYZ? If so, consider that ABC is how it is."The way to begin an answer to that is either by, "Yes, I meant XYZ." or "No, I meant UIO instead."But you reply, "Do not ignore the facts!!! [long list of reasons for why ABC could be how it is]". . . ??? I know that Baiken has more influence and friends than you do---I brought it up. You don't need to explain possible reasons for that fact to me, calling your reasons facts I am ignoring. My argument is disconnected from why: why is irrelevant to my argument, since it's not based on why. It is merely based on the fact itself, and not on any of those you listed.And I only brought it up because you appeared to be irritated by being the advice target and refuse the advice because Baiken could use it more than you.By my reply, I confirmed that, yes, I was targeting you. And that, no, I did not think it sensible to refuse it by bringing up Baiken---because of ABC: he's your superior in terms of friends count and influence, the title-giving goals of the adivice.Why he's got more than you is irrelevant to my point: I believe you ought to read the advice more than him.Why would that be irrelevant exactly. If the tables were turned I would have more influence, but it wouldn't necessarily be because my personality was more desirable. *Maybe I should read your link, but please tell me because I'm feeling lazy, does it deal with personality issues?*Sepp said, May 24, 2008, 09:36:53 pmQuoteOh yes, Sepp, I must post to YOU instead of Byakko. Oh yes, that isn't completely ridiculous.And you suggested demoting [E], look at yourself.BTW, read my reply to Bastard Wolf (take into account that Byakko, has posted in the same fashion):http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg683572#msg683572??? What's ridiculous? After posting ideas how you could reduce your word count, I now really want you to stop triple posting---using one of the biggest threats available to me to reinforce how seriously I want you to stop it.I read your reply to Bastard Wolf. I don't get what you're saying or don't see its relevance. Are you complaining because I'm posting in this topic and you now also have to reply to me instead of finishing your business replying strictly to Byakko?I suppose mentioning [E] implies you mean I am acting incorrectly? What then, should I do?Whoa, I think because I had to rush out of my house I messed up. PArt of the reason why I make my posts so long is because I fear I'll miss something or else qwill not answer something completely (within what I view as my current ability). I try to answer all parts of a post (I even try to answer them in all the directions I think they could go in). besides that fact, i don't want to be told i'm avoiding something.About the threat thing, God I was wishing had time to edit that post before I left. I wanted to ask you, if you were being serious or not. I had really interpretted it as you being irritated at me not taking your advice for post shortening. That is my fault, I should have asked from the beginning... On a side note, some of your posts come off as if you're trying to say that while replying to other people I try to point a finger at Byakko. I am doing that on purpose because I wanna see who'll call me out for it, and fail to notice that he has been too. Possibly even before me.)Cyanide said, May 25, 2008, 12:00:04 amQuoteAnd Cyanide, had YOU said it, I wouldn't have gotten offended.Noone else is allowed to correct you if you look like you're doing something rude? You can't enforce that. If you've done something that's not nettiquette you WILL be pulled up on it.That just says grudge against Baiken to me.Oh Please. As I said:What did you just say??? said, May 24, 2008, 01:48:56 pmThere are many times that people who I'm addressing have misinterpretted my post and replied with a definite interpretation, only to have me say something like, "Sorry, I didn't mean to coem off that way you. What I was trying to say was..."That has happened many times. Had it been Byakko I was replying to, instead of you, I would have posted just what I said above. This was instead a "jump-in," (and not even the first mind you. I've let others slide as I've already stated), and that was the final straw.Cyanide said, May 25, 2008, 12:00:04 amQuote- That is why I'm asking my questions, does he believe that given the facts it was reasonable, and why, after saying "in this case" do his [AI Coder's] actions match p with mine.Cos it is a FUCKING COINCIDENCE. He didn't name you. He wasn't entirely sure (as he's said) who did it and AVOIDED naming you for that purpose. He didn't want to start precisely what you're doing. After 2 years. He has in fact (once more) accepted that it WASN'T you. Why can't you take his word for it? It's really very petty to keep going on something like this when the other party has taken your word about something and you still want to make his comments all about you.Cyanide, are you reading this? First of all, I have taken his word for it, that's not my point.My point is that beause he has called me out for my bad language, does he believe that in that topic, when you weigh in all of the facts in his post (and the "in this case" is KEY because that adds specificity to his post. He made it so he couldn't be talking about any other situation except "1," the exact one that KFM was addressing), does he believe that I would be right to say HE spoke badly, and that IF I WERE to get the interpretation that the [AI Coder] was me, it would have been fair ("Coincidence" vs. "In this case...")Cyanide said, May 25, 2008, 12:00:04 amWould you like him to backtrack and start blaming you now?Would you like to backtrack, and start reading what I'm saying?
place holder, needs more thought...FirstQuoteThat has happened many times.Right, so why haven't you improved on it yet. I mean.QuoteHad it been Byakko I was replying to, instead of you, I would have posted just what I said above. This was instead a "jump-in," (and not even the first mind you. I've let others slide as I've already stated), and that was the final straw.andQuoteAnd Cyanide, had YOU said it, I wouldn't have gotten offended. The reason for that was because my post did after all come in reply to YOU. Had YOU, the person to whom I replied, said, 'hjk, you were yelling' I would have clarified.Really do seem to go against each other. And niether statement nullifies my point. If you do something rude. Someone is going to pull you up on it. Thats a pretty concrete fact. If they disagree, they'll tell you.What you're trying to achieve is impossible. Baiken (hope i'm not putting words in his mouth) doesn't believe what he wrote was really up for misinterpretation by the vast majority, as you're the only one who's misunderstanding what he wrote. 2 fucking years later.Could this be solved if he said "No it's not fair to say that in that situation" or would you refute him on that too?
