QuoteAnd 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.Yeah, except not, because, you know... I pointed out what I was doing. My post was not misleading because I said clearly what I was doing. Your post was misleading because you didn't.QuoteWhy go for the negative, even before thinking it out.Because it's you and you're known for doing shit like that. Remember that topic where we had an argument for about 19 pages for something completely retarded ? Yeah, this one here. Or the one when you freaked out because your name was merely mentionned in a discussion about AI patches ? You're known for doing that, and this post really, really could *not* look like anything other than shouting. If you see something that really looks blue, you're going to call it blue. Even if it's not really blue. So for the same reason, if you really, really look like you're yelling and it doesn't even seem remotely possible that it might be anything else than yelling, you're not going to ask any question.Your post looked like you were yelling. It did not look like you were just emphasizing a point. So I thought you were yelling. So I said "you're yelling".QuoteThat last sentence. How did it relate to teh specific point you were making here?Uh ? It relates because you're the one who doesn't get what people say, and you hastily conclude that you are the one I was talking about, and to this day, you still insist that your conclusion was fair. When you could just have pointed out that qwer was there, then ask if I was blaming you for it.QuoteIf you messed up the detailsYou still don't get that the details didn't have any impact on what I was saying, so of course I ignored them.Quoteand locked yourself, with your own bad wordingSays the guy who adamantly refuses to understand maybe he's the one who misunderstood.QuoteThis is me countering you with an example that is in both of our memories.This is you countering with something you made up in your mind and refuse to get out of. Also it's not a counter at all since you're not even replying to what I say, it's like you're changing the subject.Quote*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?*A counter-argument is when you give a valid argument that goes against another one that was just said.Mind you, your "counters" are based on something that has no impact on what I was saying. So what you're doing really is talking about something else.QuoteAdding in my details, made your post wrongExcept your detail was irrelevant to the point I was making.QuoteYou mean where I pointed out that I believe you mistyped, right.... ? This has no connection to what I just said. I'm saying that I said it may or may not have been intentionnal. Whatever mistyping you're talking about has zero relevance with that.QuoteBut then what's the point in saying it in the first place? Because it's a fact that you didn't notice. If you're looking for apples on the south, and a guy comes at yuo and say there's an apple in the north, you really aren't supposed to explain that apples grow on trees. It's irrelevant, and it's what you're doing.QuoteI want to know why here, Sepp, felt teh need to say something like that.Because he figured you needed it... Just like he would figure you may be wet so he gives you an umbrella.QuoteWould it be just the simple fact that he wanted to make a statement?There ! See when you try harder ? You start understanding what people say.
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.. . . you said you always have a dictionary or thesaurus nearby when reading posts by, I believe it was Winane, DavidGee, Jared or me.. . . and you somehow keep misinterpreting a post I made days ago. Haven't you noticed? You're still asking silly questions about it. Everybody else understood.QuoteLogic? 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.lol kiss my ass!! No wait---Show me!! Give me at least three specific examples of where exactly I am completely ignoring the why!!!QuoteI'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).QuoteYou posted that Byakko had more friends than me. I'm just supposed to sit back and accept that?ROFLQuoteNo, 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."The first thing you would think. See? What you would think. You. It's all in your head! Haha.QuotePlease tell me, 'why' you used the point that Byakko had more friends than me, in your reply to my post.lolI pointed at you, and you pointed at Byakko instead. So I used an absolute dead-sure incontestable killer argument to nullify your finger-pointing and point back at you again.sepp: here read thathjk: me?!? but byakko--sepp: --you need it more, your influence is less!hjk: ... kDead-sure like rain drops when it rains and apples falling from trees. Or so I thought.QuoteI 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?Oh fuck you tooYou demand specific underlined examples because to you I need to back up every observation and thought I utter. You want to see where I'm getting my ideas from, and when I grant your wish, you do say "I made a mistake" but complain "why the heck do you bring it up now, are you going to hold that thing against me forever?"jeeeeez---you wanted it that way!QuoteQuoteA 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.WTF?! You keep wanting me to post things. You lost the course of the conversation, I think. It went like this:sepp makes a guess and says, if correct, that would be bad.hjk asks, what? don't understand thatsepp clarifies why it would be badhjk wants specific situations or more than one (lol!)Does that mean you contest the notion that somebody who fits my description would be bad for a forum?!? Seriously? You don't get this and want examples of situations in which it would be bad? Or did you forget what we were talking about?QuoteI'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.oh fuck your Yun topicQuoteSo 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.Since your assumption is incorrect I won't break my head trying to figure out what the rest of your sentence means.QuoteWhat? 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.Here, no? Well, why not? What's wrong with the analogies, eh? How are the situations different? I WANT SPECIFIC EXAMPLES HAHA. Two OR MORE IF YOU LIKE. If there's a significant difference, I will even be content with only one. I'm not greedy. lolQuoteSepp 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.My reply is located diagonal up.Top right corner.readable only by those with a pure heart. teeheeQuoteAnyway, 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.Huh what? . . . just try triple posting again to find out.Quote*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).Ask yourself one thing.Suppose you were an uninvolved third party. Would you start discussions with Baiken and yourself simultaneously?
I now feel tempted to read what this new entity wrote in previous posts that made this turn into a three men show (or were all those quotes still directed at Baiken?).QuoteMy reply is located diagonal up.Top right corner.readable only by those with a pure heart. teeheeThis does a great job summing up half of what's been said in this thread, believe it or not.
Spoiler, click to toggle visibiltyValodim said, May 27, 2008, 06:14:20 pmwho are you and what did you do to sepphjk disapproves when I post for onlookers. and please, hjk, let's not ignore the facts:Spoiler: facts!! (click to see content)there once was a user who posted about as much as youhe got into many discsussionhe never stoppedI corrected his spelling once and immediately banned him the next time he repeated the mistake(absolutely ridiculous of me to do that, really: it was only a difference of one letter!)He merely wrote compatibility as compatability*sigh* Poor old ill-treated misunderstood GohanSSM2.
Satobyaku Sei said, May 26, 2008, 05:02:26 pmJust post the facts, you will come out as rather rude, but at least you will be read.It's interesting though, with Sepp's point it's kind of coming off as if he wants me to disregard teh facts, BUT, I'm finding something very interesting about his point in relation to the beginnings of this argument (Byakko vs. Me) in the first place.Byakko, tell me how it is possible taht you ended up not replying to this?:What did you just say??? said, May 26, 2008, 06:38:11 am- 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 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteAnd 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.Yeah, except not, because, you know... I pointed out what I was doing. My post was not misleading because I said clearly what I was doing. Your post was misleading because you didn't.My point is that you KNOW there is more than one reason why someone may post in large text. Why is it that you jumped toward teh negative and why couldn't you just ask.Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteWhy go for the negative, even before thinking it out.Because it's you and you're known for doing shit like that. Remember that topic where we had an argument for about 19 pages for something completely retarded ? Yeah, this one here. Or the one when you freaked out because your name was merely mentionned in a discussion about AI patches ? You're known for doing that, and this post really, really could *not* look like anything other than shouting. If you see something that really looks blue, you're going to call it blue. Even if it's not really blue. So for the same reason, if you really, really look like you're yelling and it doesn't even seem remotely possible that it might be anything else than yelling, you're not going to ask any question.Your post looked like you were yelling. It did not look like you were just emphasizing a point. So I thought you were yelling. So I said "you're yelling".Out of your playbook, it looked to you like I was yelling. The fact still remains you could have asked.Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteThat last sentence. How did it relate to teh specific point you were making here?Uh ? It relates because you're the one who doesn't get what people say, and you hastily conclude that you are the one I was talking about, and to this day, you still insist that your conclusion was fair. When you could just have pointed out that qwer was there, then ask if I was blaming you for it.One, I never concluded that it was me you were talking about, I'm asking if that conclusion would have been fair.Second... hastily? I posted the 'why' your post language was bad there. You have yet to challenge my 'why.'http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg684252#msg684252Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteIf you messed up the detailsYou still don't get that the details didn't have any impact on what I was saying, so of course I ignored them.No. The details made you wrong. Challenge my 'why.' Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteand locked yourself, with your own bad wordingSays the guy who adamantly refuses to understand maybe he's the one who misunderstood.How did I misunderstand? You need to kill my 'why.'Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteThis is me countering you with an example that is in both of our memories.This is you countering with something you made up in your mind and refuse to get out of. Also it's not a counter at all since you're not even replying to what I say, it's like you're changing the subject.Oh Really? I'm going to addess this below where you say I'm finally understanding Sepp's reason for posting, 'you have more friends than me.'Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuote*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?*A counter-argument is when you give a valid argument that goes against another one that was just said.Mind you, your "counters" are based on something that has no impact on what I was saying. So what you're doing really is talking about something else.Why did you reply to this and not the part I quoted above? I really didn't require an answer to this at all. Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteAdding in my details, made your post wrongExcept your detail was irrelevant to the point I was making.Your language was bad.Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteBut then what's the point in saying it in the first place? Because it's a fact that you didn't notice. If you're looking for apples on the south, and a guy comes at yuo and say there's an apple in the north, you really aren't supposed to explain that apples grow on trees. It's irrelevant, and it's what you're doing.Addressed below with the Sepp thing.Baiken said, May 26, 2008, 08:10:38 pmQuoteWould it be just the simple fact that he wanted to make a statement?There ! See when you try harder ? You start understanding what people say.Ahhh, so let's see.In the beginning of teh argument, when you posted your thing about the common1 (same point as Cyanide), had I said something like, "Byakko, your post is irrelevant, (well actually it should have been 'understood' that I was implying this anyway)" would you have made this post?http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg678847#msg678847I mean, your post there was of a 'why' point, right? This argument started off by me challenging your 'why.'Either way, I'd say your 'why' was irrelevant as well because the NOTE, about me mislabeling the glitch, already existed, and let's not forget the fact that you understood teh note, meaning it wasn't my bad wording that made you post something irrelevant, it was something else.Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmWhat 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.. . . you said you always have a dictionary or thesaurus nearby when reading posts by, I believe it was Winane, DavidGee, Jared or me.. . . and you somehow keep misinterpreting a post I made days ago. Haven't you noticed? You're still asking silly questions about it. Everybody else understood.So wait, that automatically means I'm 'puzzling out' their meaning and misinterpretting them? Let's see, I referred to the specific situations where I used a dictionary to try to understand what you were saying, BUT, I never posted my interpretations of those posts, so how would you be able to determine whetehr I misinterpretted tehm or not? Anyway, which post of yours are you referring to, here, that I keep misinterpretting?Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteLogic? 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.lol kiss my ass!! No wait---Show me!! Give me at least three specific examples of where exactly I am completely ignoring the why!!!I was referiing to one post in particular. You had said that with the point you made that byakko, had more friends than me, that I should have left that as a fact, instead of answering with the actual 'why.' And Sepp, you post complete nonsense.Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteI'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).???Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteYou posted that Byakko had more friends than me. I'm just supposed to sit back and accept that?ROFLSo wait, posting the 'why' so that the first interpretation one would get, would be challenged was wrong of me?You made a point, and I challenged with the details. This entire discussion (me vs. Byakko) pretty much started like that (Refer to the last part of my reply to Byakko in this post).Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteNo, 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."The first thing you would think. See? What you would think. You. It's all in your head! Haha.So then what exactly was your point in posting this in teh first place?The conversation went like this:Spoiler, click to toggle visibiltySepp said, May 20, 2008, 07:51:12 pmP.S. How to Win Friends and Influence People?What did you just say??? said, May 21, 2008, 10:59:05 amYou're sending thsi to me? I'm not the one who insults people and thinks they won't get offended (and I’m not [omly] 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].”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. Preferably in your mind only; the next combo-posts might get you banned.P.S. clarifying:...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!!Let me break it there. Are you honestly saying that anyone as an onlooker would get some other idea than you effectively saying, 'Byakko, is a better person?'Anywa, my replyWhat did you just say??? said, May 24, 2008, 01:48:56 pmOH Hoh Ho Ho, Sepp. Let's not ignore some major facts:- Long List of 'why' Byakko has more influence -I list the facts because they were necessary for clarification of your misleading point.Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuotePlease tell me, 'why' you used the point that Byakko had more friends than me, in your reply to my post.lolI pointed at you, and you pointed at Byakko instead. So I used an absolute dead-sure incontestable killer argument to nullify your finger-pointing and point back at you again.sepp: here read thathjk: me?!? but byakko--sepp: --you need it more, your influence is less!hjk: ... kDead-sure like rain drops when it rains and apples falling from trees. Or so I thought.No, you're full of complete shit. You know how your point would be interpretted and I posted teh 'why' to defend myself against your point. Conveniently though, you want me to ignore the why, which would leave your post unchallenged. You didn't post anything that was, "dead-sure incontestable," you made a point taht ignored precious facts in an effort to counter me, and you failed.Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteI 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?Oh fuck you tooYou demand specific underlined examples because to you I need to back up every observation and thought I utter. You want to see where I'm getting my ideas from, and when I grant your wish, you do say "I made a mistake" but complain "why the heck do you bring it up now, are you going to hold that thing against me forever?"jeeeeez---you wanted it that way!What? I can't make any sense of this post. Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteQuoteA 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.WTF?! You keep wanting me to post things. You lost the course of the conversation, I think. It went like this:sepp makes a guess and says, if correct, that would be bad.hjk asks, what? don't understand thatsepp clarifies why it would be badhjk wants specific situations or more than one (lol!)Does that mean you contest the notion that somebody who fits my description would be bad for a forum?!? Seriously? You don't get this and want examples of situations in which it would be bad? Or did you forget what we were talking about?Oh no, I'm not contesting your assertion, I'm asking where specifically, I've done the things you're mentioning.BTW, what 'guess' are you referring to?Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteI'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.oh fuck your Yun topicYou need to read this entire shitty argument.Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteSo 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.Since your assumption is incorrect I won't break my head trying to figure out what the rest of your sentence means.In other words, I am saying that if I had actually made the assertion that I was Byakko's [AI Coder], it would have been reasonable. I'm saying it would have been reasonable, because of the points I outlined here:http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg684252#msg684252I'm asking you to challenge why I say it would have been fair, by killing my points for why it was, in thsi specific post.Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteWhat? 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.Here, no? Well, why not? What's wrong with the analogies, eh? How are the situations different? I WANT SPECIFIC EXAMPLES HAHA. Two OR MORE IF YOU LIKE. If there's a significant difference, I will even be content with only one. I'm not greedy. lolOh brother.Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuoteAnyway, 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.Huh what? . . . just try triple posting again to find out.Will do eventually. Sepp said, May 27, 2008, 06:08:05 pmQuote*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).Ask yourself one thing.Suppose you were an uninvolved third party. Would you start discussions with Baiken and yourself simultaneously?If I were a third party, I probably wouldn't have gotten involved until I actually read. But really, I dunno how I'd answer that question. I'd probably try to question both of the people involved. YOU as a third party, seem to have come in and just taken a side immediately.
QuoteNo. The details made you wrong. Challenge my 'why.' \No, your details changed some details. His point was and always has been. "The AI coder was responsible for leaking this and should not have done so. I call him to task over this"You had a supremely useful option at that point of saying "Qwer did it, here's his email take it up with him" Instead you decided he was talking about you. Changed your name, and spent a week with posts involving I AM HJK!! NOT QWER!! Noone really cared about that.Even with that taken into account it doesn't change what he was saying. If you HAD been responsible then yes he was talking about you. As you weren't he wasn't.In addition, you are the only one who managed to misunderstand the situation because you happened to have an extra fact that 90% of us would have dealt with differently. Noone else showed up saying "hjk is not qwer" did they? 1 person misunderstanding != first party writing something confusing.If 10 people, or even 5 had misunderstood him, then you could logically extend that to mean Baiken had worded something badly. As this didn't happen, and you are the only one to misunderstand, the fault is with you, not with him.
Cyanide said, May 28, 2008, 05:11:54 amQuoteNo. The details made you wrong. Challenge my 'why.' \No, your details changed some details. His point was and always has been. "The AI coder was responsible for leaking this and should not have done so. I call him to task over this"You had a supremely useful option at that point of saying "Qwer did it, here's his email take it up with him" Instead you decided he was talking about you. Changed your name, and spent a week with posts involving I AM HJK!! NOT QWER!! Noone really cared about that.Even with that taken into account it doesn't change what he was saying. If you HAD been responsible then yes he was talking about you. As you weren't he wasn't.In addition, you are the only one who managed to misunderstand the situation because you happened to have an extra fact that 90% of us would have dealt with differently. Noone else showed up saying "hjk is not qwer" did they? 1 person misunderstanding != first party writing something confusing.If 10 people, or even 5 had misunderstood him, then you could logically extend that to mean Baiken had worded something badly. As this didn't happen, and you are the only one to misunderstand, the fault is with you, not with him.Cyanide, really, please challenge the 'why' I posted. Directly challenge that:http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg684252#msg684252Kill my points that:- He said "In this situation" and that he's, "summing things up"- The [AI Coder's] actions matched up with mine- His post matched up with KFM's- He was replying to Laxxe's questionAnd also READ.I've posted and reposted this. I didn't decide that Byakko, was talking about me. I'm asking that 'IF I HAD GOTTEN THAT INTERPRETATION WOULD IT HAVE BEEN FAIR?'When the heck did I change my name in that situation?The amount of people who misunderstood will not matter. If someone kills my 'why' it would have been reasonable if had I actually concluded that I was the [AI Coder], I will concede. Just kill my 'why.' I doubt in the first place that many people were even paying that much attention to the situation.
QuoteYOU as a third party, seem to have come in and just taken a side immediately.I don't see Sepp taking Byakko's side. Seems Sepp doesn't care much about whatever Byakko did or didn't do/say.The issue is your argumentative abilities... or lack there of.I don't have to know what you guys are arguing about to see how you discuss a bit poorly. (Where are you discussing poorly? Lot's of places that I can see. Others can see it too. If I pointed them out I may have to explain why I thought each one was poor and explain that, and reread this, and counter that.I don't want to "win" a discussion.There are certain issues I cannot articulate well enough to discuss properly. I try not to discuss those issues much as it would be fruitless.I'm not attacking you, I'm not choosing sides. I'm merely attempting to explain "why" Sepp is pressing this with you. He's hoping you will see what it is you are doing.And for crying out loud, Byakko... just say "I'm sorry"
Just No Point said, May 28, 2008, 05:34:55 amQuoteYOU as a third party, seem to have come in and just taken a side immediately.I don't see Sepp taking Byakko's side. Seems Sepp doesn't care much about whatever Byakko did or didn't do/say.I dunno. I guess I'm being kind of harsh with how I'm viewing Sepp's posts but in these it seemed as though he was trying to suggest I had issues...:http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=80111.msg680517#msg680517There are some others, but I'm just too lazy to find them...Just No Point said, May 28, 2008, 05:34:55 amThe issue is your argumentative abilities... or lack there of.I don't have to know what you guys are arguing about to see how you discuss a bit poorly. (Where are you discussing poorly? Lot's of places that I can see. Others can see it too. If I pointed them out I may have to explain why I thought each one was poor and explain that, and reread this, and counter that.I don't want to "win" a discussion.There are certain issues I cannot articulate well enough to discuss properly. I try not to discuss those issues much as it would be fruitless.I understand. I really think my big issue as well is articulating what I'm trying to say. That, in writing, has always been a major screw up with me (save a few cases). Just No Point said, May 28, 2008, 05:34:55 amI'm not attacking you, I'm not choosing sides. I'm merely attempting to explain "why" Sepp is pressing this with you. He's hoping you will see what it is you are doing.I dunno. Maybe it's the way Sepp is going about it that is kind of getting to me. Just No Point said, May 28, 2008, 05:34:55 amAnd for crying out loud, Byakko... just say "I'm sorry" I really don't care for an apology, more than I just hope he'll start asking people questions or at least not post so directly. I mean, I've let him do this to 'me' multiple times before, and let them slide. I could go into situations with other people, but God...
I assume you're talking about this?Quote- 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.Thats a yes or no question btw.If it's NOT that bit. Perhaps you could stop saying why and phrase your problem in 2 sentences or less.Your extra facts do not change his overall message. The ai coders actions were bad. They should take responsibility. Thats what he's saying. You're making this all about you when it's not, and never was.I don't need to respond to all your damn points either. They're just mini clarifications/obfuscations on the same damn topic.
Cyanide said, May 28, 2008, 06:19:07 amI assume you're talking about this?Quote- 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.Thats a yes or no question btw.That is part of it.Cyanide said, May 28, 2008, 06:19:07 amYour extra facts do not change his overall message. The ai coders actions were bad. They should take responsibility. Thats what he's saying. You're making this all about you when it's not, and never was.Either way you take it, he got the actions of the [AI Coder] wrong. Besides the bit that matched up with me, qwer never went behind KFM's back and released the patch (none of us did that at all). To say that, 'KFM said no, and the [AI Coder] did it anyway,' is also something I've pointed out, and told Byakko, he was wrong on.Cyanide said, May 28, 2008, 06:19:07 amI don't need to respond to all your damn points either. They're just mini clarifications/obfuscations on the same damn topic.You should. Satou Sei said, May 28, 2008, 06:34:05 amNo, hjk. You are the demons.It's kind of funny. I'm actually trying to see if anyone will answer me, 'based on Byakko's language.' Not what he meant, but, BASED ON HIS LANGUAGE.
QuoteYou should.Not really, that would just make a quote filled confusing topic more quote filled and confusing.
