QuoteWhy would that be irrelevant exactly.Because he decides so. He's telling you about XYZ and you're answering him about ABC. Don't. ABC has nothing to do with XYZ. Even if ABC is true, XYZ is also still true.If he's saying "this is how it is", it's completely useless of you to discuss why. The cause is not relevant to the fact itself. Reply to the fact, not what you figure is the cause. Because he is telling you about XYZ, not ABC.You do that way too often, answering with something that doesn't affect what you were told in the first place.QuoteThis was instead a "jump-in," and that was the final straw.When I see something I think deserves a comment, I can't see what difference it makes. Yes, I jumped in. So what ? Big deal. Why should I not be allowed to voice my opinion on something I come across with ? Can you not accept criticism depending on who it comes from ? If you're given feedback on anything, why does it matter who says it, or even how he says it ? You should aknonwledge the comment regardless of that. You can also give comment on how much of a jerk I am or how many mistakes I do, but this doesn't change what I'm telling you ; so you do it afterward, instead of using it to cover up what I said.Quotedoes he believe that I would be right to say HE spoke badlyNo, I don't believe I spoke badly. What I said was still true, regardless of the detail you brought up. I was talking about responsibility, not about who did it.Must I remind that at that time, people were saying there was nothing wrong with the patch ? So I "jumped in" and said that, if the patch was distributed after KFM said no, then yes, there was a responsibility. I said it while not knowing that the one who asked wasn't the one who did the coding, but it didn't change what I was saying. So no, I didn't speak badly.Quoteand that IF I WERE to get the interpretation that the [AI Coder] was me, it would have been fairNo it wasn't. Yes, my description matched your action. Because I didn't know qwer even existed. But you did. So you should have known that it was only a matter of you pointing it out. And that it wouldn't even have affected what I said. Your reaction, you holding a grudge for 1~2 years, was not fair.And before you ask me again why I even spoke like that if I didn't know that particular detail, I'll say the same thing as before : -because I had no reason to do otherwise-because that detail didn't change anything of what I was saying.So no, my speech was normal, and your reaction was not.
- I'm sleepy so my reply might not be the best here -- Byakko, I want to see your earlier post still and possibly even reply -Cyanide said, May 25, 2008, 03:42:01 amFirstQuoteThat has happened many times.Right, so why haven't you improved on it yet. I mean.Because sometimes, I really don't think people will get offended, but when they do, it catches me completely off guard, so I apologize for my mistakes and try to fix and explain them. I apologize, because I tend to reread my posts and subject them to pretty harsh interpretations so I can see why, someone would have been offended. It is also common for me to note where I may come off badly (I note because I usually don't have time to fix it), so I can avoid an argument. Even when I was being submissive, there was 1 situation where a person took one of my posts the wrong way.For me, I dunno, I tend to want to ask before seeing the negative, because I know that communication over the internet is much harder than RL.Either way though, the real point I was making with that statement circled around the person I replied to.Cyanide said, May 25, 2008, 03:42:01 amQuoteHad 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.Wait, what? Please explain why they go against each other?The first one was saying if the person I replied to posted their interpretation, then I would have replied with my explanation.The second was simply saying that the fact was that YOU were the person I replied to, "YOU, the person to whom I replied," and with that being the case, I would have replied with an explanation.I'm debating with myself as to whether I spke in a real "understood" or if the part of the post I quote should have clarified it. *Again, I'm sleepy, so I'll do it when I wake up*Cyanide said, May 25, 2008, 03:42:01 amWhat 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.I'm saying that with all of the facts weighed, literally what he said could have been worded a lot better.Cyanide said, May 25, 2008, 03:42:01 amCould 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?I was waiting for that. Really, I want for him to outline why. I can never understand something unless the why is answered, or else things to me appear to have no meaning. I do not understand, why, why wouldn't be important to any situation.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 04:10:26 amQuoteWhy would that be irrelevant exactly.Because he decides so. He's telling you about XYZ and you're answering him about ABC. Don't. ABC has nothing to do with XYZ. Even if ABC is true, XYZ is also still true.If he's saying "this is how it is", it's completely useless of you to discuss why. The cause is not relevant to the fact itself. Reply to the fact, not what you figure is the cause. Because he is telling you about XYZ, not ABC.You do that way too often, answering with something that doesn't affect what you were told in the first place.'To me' (Please Note - TO ME) that just comes off as 'fancy-talk.' For me, relevant points must always be backed up with a why; for me anything with meaning must be backed up with a why.Here, for him to say you have more friends and influence than me may be a fact, but for me, I want to have a good reason for the fact or else its just a statement that doesn't change anything.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 04:10:26 amQuoteThis was instead a "jump-in," and that was the final straw.When I see something I think deserves a comment, I can't see what difference it makes. Yes, I jumped in. So what ? Big deal. Why should I not be allowed to voice my opinion on something I come across with ? Can you not accept criticism depending on who it comes from ? If you're given feedback on anything, why does it matter who says it, or even how he says it ? You should aknonwledge the comment regardless of that. You can also give comment on how much of a jerk I am or how many mistakes I do, but this doesn't change what I'm telling you ; so you do it afterward, instead of using it to cover up what I said.But what I'm saying is that there are other times where you've come in and posted just as you did here and I let them go. Here, I just didn't want to take it. Promise me this Byakko, please just promise me this, if you're going to post an interpretation at all to anyone, especially when youre outside a topic, d not post anything that is an insult. OR, please ask, as I tend to do.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 04:10:26 amQuotedoes he believe that I would be right to say HE spoke badlyNo, I don't believe I spoke badly. What I said was still true, regardless of the detail you brought up. I was talking about responsibility, not about who did it.Must I remind that at that time, people were saying there was nothing wrong with the patch ? So I "jumped in" and said that, if the patch was distributed after KFM said no, then yes, there was a responsibility. I said it while not knowing that the one who asked wasn't the one who did the coding, but it didn't change what I was saying. So no, I didn't speak badly.I'm simply pointing out, that with what you said, it appears that all roads lead to me.Please, answer me, with a true why, if I actualy had linked the [AI Coder] up with myself, it wouldn't have been fair.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 04:10:26 amQuoteand that IF I WERE to get the interpretation that the [AI Coder] was me, it would have been fairNo it wasn't. Yes, my description matched your action. Because I didn't know qwer even existed. But you did. So you should have known that it was only a matter of you pointing it out. And that it wouldn't even have affected what I said. Your reaction, you holding a grudge for 1~2 years, was not fair.And before you ask me again why I even spoke like that if I didn't know that particular detail, I'll say the same thing as before : -because I had no reason to do otherwise-because that detail didn't change anything of what I was saying.So no, my speech was normal, and your reaction was not.But the details did change what you were literally saying. *Now this may come off badly as well, but Ill try to make it sound better*: the words of your post made you seem as if you knew the facts of the situation. In your post you answered, how it occured, the actions of the [AI Coder], and how many people were involved, ending with, you were "summing things up." Let me just say, teh part that particularly offends'' me was the "the [AI Coder] did it anyway." It is not even the fact that i thought it could be me or not, it is the fact that you potentially said any one of us did that (again considering teh "in this case," the, "summing things up," and the fact that you were replying to Laxxe) and no one did.*Oh God, let me stop there. - Really, I've been trying to build to that point, but yeah, that's the real stitch in my side. I really hope I didn't offend you, but in addressing the specific situation ("In this case" -> semantics), that detail, wasn't right.*
Quote'To me' (Please Note - TO ME) that just comes off as 'fancy-talk.' For me, relevant points must always be backed up with a why; for me anything with meaning must be backed up with a why.Here, for him to say you have more friends and influence than me may be a fact, but for me, I want to have a good reason for the fact or else its just a statement that doesn't change anything.Then this is your problem, not ours.QuoteBut what I'm saying is that there are other times where you've come in and posted just as you did here and I let them go. Here, I just didn't want to take it. Promise me this Byakko, please just promise me this, if you're going to post an interpretation at all to anyone, especially when youre outside a topic, d not post anything that is an insult. OR, please ask, as I tend to do.No. As I've said, I have no reason to.QuoteI'm simply pointing out, that with what you said, it appears that all roads lead to me.Still as irrelevant as it was the first time.QuotePlease, answer me, with a true why, if I actualy had linked the [AI Coder] up with myself, it wouldn't have been fair.I've said it several times already :-Because I didn't know about qwer and you did-because it didn't change anything of what I was saying.QuoteBut the details did change what you were literally saying.No, it did not. I can't see why you say it did.Quotethe words of your post made you seem as if you knew the facts of the situation.So what ?? It doesn't change anything.QuoteLet me just say, teh part that particularly offends'' me was the "the [AI Coder] did it anyway." It is not even the fact that i thought it could be me or not, it is the fact that you potentially said any one of us did that (again considering teh "in this case," the, "summing things up," and the fact that you were replying to Laxxe) and no one did.I know and I don't care. This doesn't change what I said.Also keyword in your post is "POTENTIALLY". You can't possibly have blown up on a "potentially" ? I was talking about how there was a responsibility. I also specifically said back then that it may or may not have been intentionnal ! Do you not remember that one ? You remember how it might have matched with your actions, you remember how I might have been hinting that you or qwer were "guilty", but you don't remember I specifically said it may or may not have been intentionnal ? If your problem is that I "potentially" said it might be your fault (or qwer's), then why are you ignoring how I specifically said it might not have been ? Because this was your answer.
What did you just say??? said, May 25, 2008, 03:14:04 amOh 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.lol-high drive for self-expression: you post in this topic like crazy, even three times in a row!-sub-par reading comprehension: you resort to dictionaries to puzzle out individual words and often wrongly interpret posts by other users-sub-par argumentation skills: logic is fancy talk to you, I mean... wtf! xD-sub-par presentation skills: you write far too much, even three posts in a row!!-sub-par communication skills: you incorrectly use words like coherent, causing confusionQuote*Please Clarify, because I didn't understand.*A high frequency poster who has trouble reading the intention of posts by others and tends to present his unlogical statements in a badly worded blown-up way is likely to cause irritation no matter where he posts or to whom he replies.Bad for forum.QuoteWhy would that be irrelevant exactly.lolYou ask why it would be irrelevant in reply to my explanation?!? Byakko explained it, too. You still not getting it is a sign of bad reading comprehension and strange logic. Another try, with real-world examples instead of ABC and XYZ to make it more graspable...sepp: here, take that umbrella so you won't get wethjk: why me?!? doesn't it sometimes rain even worse in france?!sepp: yet consider that you get much wetter than the french anyway; take the umbrella, you could use it morehjk: hey don't ignore the facts: the french stay drier because they can escape some of the rain with their self-built cars while I'm unable to build onesepp: i know that they stay drier; i brought it up to make you see reason and take an umbrella. but why the french stay drier even under heavier rain is irrelevant to my point, which is me saying you could use an umbrella more than they could; so just take one alreadyhjk: not it's not irrelevant! not to me! i must always know the whys of anything or it's not a valid argument!!To sepp's great irritation, instead of simply taking or leaving the umbrella, hjk first demands a debate over the weather situation in another country, saying it's vital that umbrella offerings be backed up with French weather discussions in order to be valid------at which point sepp is likely to give up, I only wanted to give you an umbrella! and whack hjk some over the head with it.Quote If the tables were turned I would have more influence, but it wouldn't necessarily be because my personality was more desirable.Huh? Is this supposed to be an argument?? For or against what? Yes, it wouldn't necessarily be because your personality was more desirable. Of course not. Naturally. But that has nothing to do with anything we said so far, and nobody ever claimed that it would.Quote*Maybe I should read your link, but please tell me because I'm feeling lazy, does it deal with personality issues?*Not at all. It deals with arguments, presentation and communication.Sepp said, May 24, 2008, 09:36:53 pmWhoa, 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.Yeah. Below average presentation and communication skills, you know? :pQuoteAbout 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...lolReading comprehension! I really was irritated at you not taking my advice for post shortening:Sepp said, May 24, 2008, 09:36:53 pmAfter 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.QuoteOn 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.)Dude, should somebody tell you to stop pointing fingers it would not automatically mean that he's failing to notice that somebody else also did it as well. That would be invalid logic. And ff you're only worried that everybody jumps on you but Baiken might to be getting away blameless once again, just say so.
- Came back from a Soccer game, and now am hitting road again -- Sorry about the post length. I like to quote and 'explain' too much I guess -Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 01:30:02 pmQuote'To me' (Please Note - TO ME) that just comes off as 'fancy-talk.' For me, relevant points must always be backed up with a why; for me anything with meaning must be backed up with a why.Here, for him to say you have more friends and influence than me may be a fact, but for me, I want to have a good reason for the fact or else its just a statement that doesn't change anything.Then this is your problem, not ours.But really, why post that in teh first place? It's just comes off as a point that doesn't mean anything.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 01:30:02 pmQuoteBut what I'm saying is that there are other times where you've come in and posted just as you did here and I let them go. Here, I just didn't want to take it. Promise me this Byakko, please just promise me this, if you're going to post an interpretation at all to anyone, especially when youre outside a topic, d not post anything that is an insult. OR, please ask, as I tend to do.No. As I've said, I have no reason to.Why wouldn't you ahve a reason to. I've avoided arguing with you when you've done this before , it's only that this time I couldn't let it slide. What I think is that you could avoid arguing with anyone if you just slowed down and asked.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 01:30:02 pmQuoteI'm simply pointing out, that with what you said, it appears that all roads lead to me.Still as irrelevant as it was the first time.Personally, I don't think it is irrelevant to teh point I AM making.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 01:30:02 pmQuotePlease, answer me, with a true why, if I actualy had linked the [AI Coder] up with myself, it wouldn't have been fair.I've said it several times already :-Because I didn't know about qwer and you did-because it didn't change anything of what I was saying.QuoteBut the details did change what you were literally saying.No, it did not. I can't see why you say it did.I'm saying it did, because the way you outlined teh situation in your post was not correct. By saying, "In this case" and summing it up, your details, "in the specific case" were made wrong after "I" had posted (I gotta go to your point below though).Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 01:30:02 pmQuotethe words of your post made you seem as if you knew the facts of the situation.So what ?? It doesn't change anything.ugh. Above.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 01:30:02 pmQuoteLet me just say, teh part that particularly offends'' me was the "the [AI Coder] did it anyway." It is not even the fact that i thought it could be me or not, it is the fact that you potentially said any one of us did that (again considering teh "in this case," the, "summing things up," and the fact that you were replying to Laxxe) and no one did.I know and I don't care. This doesn't change what I said.Also keyword in your post is "POTENTIALLY". You can't possibly have blown up on a "potentially" ? I was talking about how there was a responsibility.Let me cut it off right there. I was also not trying to offend you in this post (as I said). I added in teh potentially to avoid even more of a fight. You know what teh question I'd re-ask is.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 01:30:02 pmI also specifically said back then that it may or may not have been intentionnal ! Do you not remember that one ? You remember how it might have matched with your actions, you remember how I might have been hinting that you or qwer were "guilty", but you don't remember I specifically said it may or may not have been intentionnal ? If your problem is that I "potentially" said it might be your fault (or qwer's), then why are you ignoring how I specifically said it might not have been ? Because this was your answer.I don't remember that. Would that have been before or after the specific post I'm quoting.- I was hoping for this -Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pmWhat did you just say??? said, May 25, 2008, 03:14:04 amOh 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.-high drive for self-expression: you post in this topic like crazy, even three times in a row!TrueSepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pm-sub-par reading comprehension: you resort to dictionaries to puzzle out individual words and often wrongly interpret posts by other usersWhere? I want some specific examples of this.Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pm-sub-par argumentation skills: logic is fancy talk to you, I mean... wtf! xDLogic? You call what you posted "logical?" To make a post that completely ignores the 'why,' has no real point to me. Substantiate it with something, or else its just a point that changes nothing.I'm saying this because I don't understand you at all: It seems like you're using the fact that you may be smarter than me (not sure I could word that better), to post something that makes no sense, so any onlooker would just take your side without even thinking about what you said (I'm not saying that's what's going on, i'm saying that's how it seem to me).You posted that Byakko had more friends than me. I'm just supposed to sit back and accept that? No, I'm going to post the 'why' to make my own point. Again, to me it 'seems like' you're posting to onlookers. I know that with you posting someone had more friends than another, the first thing I'd think would be that you were effectively saying, "Person A, is a better person, than Person B."Please tell me, 'why' you used the point that Byakko had more friends than me, in your reply to my post.Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pm-sub-par presentation skills: you write far too much, even three posts in a row!!That hurt. True.Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pm-sub-par communication skills: you incorrectly use words like coherent, causing confusionI used that word incorrectly, because I had looked it up before and found a definition (-> logical. Really a synonym). Are you going to use that to cloud everything that I'm posting?Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pmQuote*Please Clarify, because I didn't understand.*A high frequency poster who has trouble reading the intention of posts by others and tends to present his unlogical statements in a badly worded blown-up way is likely to cause irritation no matter where he posts or to whom he replies.Bad for forum.Oh I see. I want you to post a specific situation, or more than one if you like.I'm gonna make and assumption, and say as one of them you'll take the one of me talking about Byakko's post in the Yun topic.So please, if I am right, refute my points for 'why' I say it would have reasonable if I actually had gotten the interpretation that I was the [AI Coder] given his language and the other facts.Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pmQuoteWhy would that be irrelevant exactly.lolYou ask why it would be irrelevant in reply to my explanation?!? Byakko explained it, too. You still not getting it is a sign of bad reading comprehension and strange logic. Another try, with real-world examples instead of ABC and XYZ to make it more graspable...sepp: here, take that umbrella so you won't get wethjk: why me?!? doesn't it sometimes rain even worse in france?!sepp: yet consider that you get much wetter than the french anyway; take the umbrella, you could use it morehjk: hey don't ignore the facts: the french stay drier because they can escape some of the rain with their self-built cars while I'm unable to build onesepp: i know that they stay drier; i brought it up to make you see reason and take an umbrella. but why the french stay drier even under heavier rain is irrelevant to my point, which is me saying you could use an umbrella more than they could; so just take one alreadyhjk: not it's not irrelevant! not to me! i must always know the whys of anything or it's not a valid argument!!To sepp's great irritation, instead of simply taking or leaving the umbrella, hjk first demands a debate over the weather situation in another country, saying it's vital that umbrella offerings be backed up with French weather discussions in order to be valid------at which point sepp is likely to give up, I only wanted to give you an umbrella! and whack hjk some over the head with it.What? How can you equate the point here to a situation like that. The situation you posted about would indeed be ridiculous, but here, No. Yes, you said you wanted to make it more clear by using a real-world example, but a link like this, doesn't do it for me, sorry.Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pmQuote If the tables were turned I would have more influence, but it wouldn't necessarily be because my personality was more desirable.Huh? Is this supposed to be an argument?? For or against what? Yes, it wouldn't necessarily be because your personality was more desirable. Of course not. Naturally. But that has nothing to do with anything we said so far, and nobody ever claimed that it would.Addressed above.Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pmQuote*Maybe I should read your link, but please tell me because I'm feeling lazy, does it deal with personality issues?*Not at all. It deals with arguments, presentation and communication.I see.Sepp said, May 24, 2008, 09:36:53 pmQuoteWhoa, 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.Yeah. Below average presentation and communication skills, you know? :pYour presentation point, Yes. Communication... mehSepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pmQuoteAbout 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...lolReading comprehension! I really was irritated at you not taking my advice for post shortening: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."LOL Reading Comprehension" Not sure how you meant that? I'd probably put it more toward deciding whether you were serious or not, over actually understanding what you typed (another literal vs. subliminal argument) *Besides the Point*Anyway, what you said was ridiculous, which is why, I said in the post ou quoted, that I wish I had time to edit that, because it was so ridiculous(to me) in fact, that instead of quickly typing, I should have asked the question I wanted to in the first place.Sepp said, May 24, 2008, 09:36:53 pmQuoteOn 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.)Dude, should somebody tell you to stop pointing fingers it would not automatically mean that he's failing to notice that somebody else also did it as well. That would be invalid logic. And ff you're only worried that everybody jumps on you but Baiken might to be getting away blameless once again, just say so.*I HATE YOU *I do somewhat feel targetted because I'm the one who was sort of called out for it, when it was two sided. But, meh, more than likely I won't say anything (I was actually thinking very negatively of myself for making a 'point the finger' post at all during this thread).
QuoteBut really, why post that in teh first place? It's just comes off as a point that doesn't mean anything.What ?? But it's what we're telling you ! It's your reply that doesn't mean anything.QuoteWhy wouldn't you ahve a reason to.Why would I have a reason to ?QuoteWhat I think is that you could avoid arguing with anyone if you just slowed down and asked.No. Your post looked like this and that, so I said this and that. Why would I ask ? And again, clean your own house before telling me something like that. You're the one holding a grudge for 1~2 years.QuotePersonally, I don't think it is irrelevant to teh point I AM making.It's your whole point that is irrelevant. Your reply has no connectino to what we're telling you in the first place, so no, your point is not relevant.QuoteI'm saying it did, because the way you outlined teh situation in your post was not correct.It didn't change anything. So what if I had the details wrong ? Whether I had the details right or not, it didn't change the point I was making, because the point I was making was not related to that detail.Stop your crap about me not outlining the situation properly, your detail had nothing to do with what I was saying. Why on Earth can't you understand that ? I don't care if the outline was wrong.I tell you something, you reply with something completely unrelated. You're just avoiding the point I was making.QuoteYou know what teh question I'd re-ask is.I've given you my reply thousands of times already. But you're just losing yourself into irrelevant questions.I tell you that I didn't care about that detail, you ask me why I don't want to bother about that detail, but it really doesn't change anything to the fact that it's an irrelevant detail, whether you point it out or not.QuoteI don't remember that. Would that have been before or after the specific post I'm quoting.I said that the very first time, in the initial post that you misunderstood.QuoteYou posted that Byakko had more friends than me. I'm just supposed to sit back and accept that? No, I'm going to post the 'why' to make my own point.I have a 'why' for you : why would you do that ? If someone tells you that apples fall on the ground, do you really need to go and discover gravity ? Does your dicovery of gravity change anything to the reality that apples fall on the ground ? It changes minor details, such as the speed at which it does so. But does it suddenly become false that apples fall on the ground ?If someone tells you that he saw an apple fall on the ground the other day, and you go on about the laws of gravity, then you're not making any sense nor relevance and the guy will just slap you in the face.
Out of curiosity, I decided to see how many sheets of paper it would take to print out this page.The answer is 14.
What did you just say??? said, May 25, 2008, 08:59:14 pmSepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pm-sub-par reading comprehension: you resort to dictionaries to puzzle out individual words and often wrongly interpret posts by other usersWhere? I want some specific examples of this.Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pm-sub-par communication skills: you incorrectly use words like coherent, causing confusionI used that word incorrectly, because I had looked it up before and found a definition (-> logical. Really a synonym). Are you going to use that to cloud everything that I'm posting?
Actually, I think this thread is more comparable to meatspin. It's incredibly gay, but it's also so hilarious that you can't stop watching it.
Just No Point said, May 26, 2008, 02:01:53 amSpoiler, click to toggle visibiltyWhat did you just say??? said, May 25, 2008, 08:59:14 pmSepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pm-sub-par reading comprehension: you resort to dictionaries to puzzle out individual words and often wrongly interpret posts by other usersWhere? I want some specific examples of this.Sepp said, May 25, 2008, 05:58:06 pm-sub-par communication skills: you incorrectly use words like coherent, causing confusionI used that word incorrectly, because I had looked it up before and found a definition (-> logical. Really a synonym). Are you going to use that to cloud everything that I'm posting?I was waiting for someone to hastily post that. Didn't expect it to be you though. Sepp's first post said, by "other" users. The post addressed in the second was one of my own (I didn't misinterpret my own post). Camman,' you should've seen that. Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmQuoteBut really, why post that in teh first place? It's just comes off as a point that doesn't mean anything.What ?? But it's what we're telling you ! It's your reply that doesn't mean anything.I'm going to just make the point that I post the 'why' to back my posts up, but that is ignorable right now.Byakko, we're going to take this back to the top where this discussion began.- Cyanide made a reply about my quote, unquote "wake-up" glitch that was about the common1- In my "Big Text" post to Cyanide, I had made a note that I mislabeled the glitch as a "wake-up" one, and that was before you had posted.- You made a post on the same point as Cyanide about the common1, after my "Big Text" quote where I had already stated that I had mislabeled the "wake up" thing.- After the deleting thing, - tuh, tuh, tuh - you said, "I blame again your complete incapacity at explaining yourself properly..." Now let me just ask you, in reference to you saying, "blame," are you saying that you made your post about the common1, because I stated something badly, or is your word "blame" in reference to something else. (*I have to know before I make my next point*)Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmQuoteWhy wouldn't you ahve a reason to.Why would I have a reason to ?To avoid arguments.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmQuoteWhat I think is that you could avoid arguing with anyone if you just slowed down and asked.No. Your post looked like this and that, so I said this and that. Why would I ask ? And again, clean your own house before telling me something like that. You're the one holding a grudge for 1~2 years.And you yourself, posted when you wrote in big text that you wanted it to be seen. You could have applied that to me and you didn't. Again, why couldn't your post here have said, "you looked like you were trying to get something noticed, so I posted that" or "you looked like you were trying to emphasize something, so I said that." Why go for the negative, even before thinking it out. Really, I think sking would have been a healthier decision. That last sentence. How did it relate to teh specific point you were making here?Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmQuotePersonally, I don't think it is irrelevant to teh point I AM making.It's your whole point that is irrelevant. Your reply has no connectino to what we're telling you in the first place, so no, your point is not relevant.I need you to answer the first part of this post in which I addressed you to reply back to this.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmQuoteI'm saying it did, because the way you outlined teh situation in your post was not correct.It didn't change anything. So what if I had the details wrong ? Whether I had the details right or not, it didn't change the point I was making, because the point I was making was not related to that detail.Stop your crap about me not outlining the situation properly, your detail had nothing to do with what I was saying. Why on Earth can't you understand that ? I don't care if the outline was wrong.I tell you something, you reply with something completely unrelated. You're just avoiding the point I was making.I'm just avoiding what? If you messed up the details, and locked yourself, with your own bad wording, into saying something you may not have intended. This is me countering you with an example that is in both of our memories. *Just a question I've been thinking about. A "counter," is it relevant or relevant, when one person makes a point. I mean it is on a polar end isn't it?* *Ohh someone's bound to say something*Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmQuoteYou know what teh question I'd re-ask is.I've given you my reply thousands of times already. But you're just losing yourself into irrelevant questions.I tell you that I didn't care about that detail, you ask me why I don't want to bother about that detail, but it really doesn't change anything to the fact that it's an irrelevant detail, whether you point it out or not.Adding in my details, made your post wrong, because you didn't word it as well as you should have.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmQuoteI don't remember that. Would that have been before or after the specific post I'm quoting.I said that the very first time, in the initial post that you misunderstood.You mean where I pointed out that I believe you mistyped, right.Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmQuoteYou posted that Byakko had more friends than me. I'm just supposed to sit back and accept that? No, I'm going to post the 'why' to make my own point.I have a 'why' for you : why would you do that ? If someone tells you that apples fall on the ground, do you really need to go and discover gravity ? Does your dicovery of gravity change anything to the reality that apples fall on the ground ? It changes minor details, such as the speed at which it does so. But does it suddenly become false that apples fall on the ground ?But then what's the point in saying it in the first place? *In all honesty, I believe he had a specific point, but I also believe that he may believe that if he stated it, it would lead us down a whole 'nother' negative road.* Baiken said, May 25, 2008, 09:18:01 pmIf someone tells you that he saw an apple fall on the ground the other day, and you go on about the laws of gravity, then you're not making any sense nor relevance and the guy will just slap you in the face.Personally, I would try to avoid equating something so simple, to the situation we're dealing with. I want to know why here, Sepp, felt teh need to say something like that. Would it be just the simple fact that he wanted to make a statement? I dunno, but that's all I'm getting here.
Oh I just skimmed the thread and saw that.I actually haven't been reading much =PI just thought that was kinda funny. I won't do it again. Quote-sub-par reading comprehension: you resort to dictionaries to puzzle out individual words and often wrongly interpret posts by other usersI also read this as 2 statements. Saying you puzzle out words and that you often wrongly interpret. Perhaps I wrongly interpreted his statement haha the irony.
Go re-read the apples falling comment. And possibly the umbrella one.I'd wash my hands of this altogether but i REALLY want you to see sense.Still don't believe it's a mugen glitch of any sort until i see some code.
HJK, you should realy come to France in preparatory classes for engineer schools. In litterature lessons, they teach you how to summarize a 3 pages text in 120 words (+/- 10%). If you put one word more than what is authorized, you get a "0" mark.The Great and Powerful Oz said, May 25, 2008, 10:17:50 pmOut of curiosity, I decided to see how many sheets of paper it would take to print out this page.The answer is 14.Do you hate the trees so much ?
Just No Point said, May 26, 2008, 07:39:11 amOh I just skimmed the thread and saw that.I actually haven't been reading much =PI just thought that was kinda funny. I won't do it again.I'm glad I sent you that PM. The fault is mine, I had no right to reply so rudely. I didn't want to pretend like I hadn't replied in that way, so I left it, and tried to explian in it the PM. Sorry for that Cyanide said, May 26, 2008, 09:55:47 amGo re-read the apples falling comment. And possibly the umbrella one.I'd wash my hands of this altogether but i REALLY want you to see sense.I read and reread them and my replies still stand, but, it's interesting though; I need Byakko's reply to my post above, before I can go further into a point I'm making.Cyanide said, May 26, 2008, 09:55:47 amStill don't believe it's a mugen glitch of any sort until i see some code.Didn't expect you to.Legen-Wait for it!-dary Cybaster said, May 26, 2008, 11:09:52 amHJK, you should realy come to France in preparatory classes for engineer schools. In litterature lessons, they teach you how to summarize a 3 pages text in 120 words (+/- 10%). If you put one word more than what is authorized, you get a "0" mark.Jeez. I wish I were there. Really, I am trying, but sometimes I get caught up in 'explaining the why' that I extend me post length a lot, minus the fact that I post quotes and requotes (outside of the 'official' little marker thing... don't know how to Identify the "[quote']-['/quote] thing
