- Location
- The Outer Plane Of Munchkinry.
Rule 4: Threadbanned.
Claiming that someone else is always going to try to "get the last word in" was a meme started by people who can't actually argue against any given point but still want to gaslight someone into thinking that their doing something wrong anyway; given that you are using it i am somewhat disenclined to lend credence to your oppinion, which in this case is the assertion that it was rude, or the reasoning that lead to it forming.
I was working under the understanding that someones willingness to do something would naturally stem from their desire to have a outcome that those actions would cause, and thus that stating that someone is unwilling to do something would naturally imply that they have less desire for any given outcome then their desire to retain what any given cause for those outcomes would cost them; naturally this would mean that anyone that it would apply to would not have those "buttons" for what i said to press.
And from a purely logistical standpoint, anyone that controls Siofras mind, which is implied to be that one god by the brand/seal/enchantment of Blue Mana that is apparently on her, would naturally control both her soul, and the location of the Witch souls that she transported via a spell controled by her mind, which i feel the need to stress was understood to have been compromised by hostile forces.
I am using writen format to convey what i am saying; as long as i am not taking up time that someone else could use to speak in a conversation there is no difference between saying one thing and saying any given number of things. I could have filled the charactor limit for my comment with text art of dickbutt, after having writen my comment, and it would not have made the slightest fraction of a difference, so filling it with vague grumblings about things that bother me should make just as little of a difference to you.
As a point of fact, i did not; i will apologize for insisting that we should take this course of action, or even that, should we chose to take said course of action, that we should use my plan for taking said course of action, but i will not appologize for claiming that, if we had a desire to take a course of action, we would be taking exactly that course of action, even if that course of action was mostly waiting until we were strong enough to follow through with a plan we had made (Or, you know, a plan to make a plan later when we had more options to string together into something like a plan). To claim otherwise, i feel, would be...Insulting, for a lack of a better word.
I'm not ascribing negative motives to anything; personally distasteful, yes, but not negative in the sense that i feel you are probably using it; just because someones desires are not my own does not mean that i feel negatively about them; it means that i try to convince them that they might desire what i do because of what those things can do for them, and if that doesn't work, then oh well, you can't always get what you want.
And at this point my plan boils down to making a plan (possibly after checking IC whether or not project "Would you miss it?" would be logisticly feasible #highfantasymath) that would achive the objective of stopping that one god from having control of that seer whos name i forget; the only way that you could give Word Of God on that is if you wanted to fully claim that something would be impossible, regardless of method, for a Planeswalker.
I was under the impression that when i was being oppinionated about the things i was, to the best of my ability, factually bringing up it was clear that that was sepperate from my...Conveyance (?) of events; if it was not clear that i was mostly just trying to express my oppinion of events while giving a recap of them, as opposed to claiming they those oppinions were facts, then i am honestly, truely, deeply sorry for any confusion or offence that may have caused anyone.
I wouldn't say i suck that badly; i manage well enough as long as people aren't putting almost all the focus of a conversation on distinguishing, and making it easier for others to distinguish, between what any given person is and is not sorry for, or, god forbid (for a lack of a better phrase), someones ability to apologize on command; i hear that's a thing that some eastern subcultures do.
I don't believe anyone who can't explain why they believe what they believe; why would those beliefes be worth enough to have them if the people who carry them don't even know why they are doing so? Like, it's perfectly fine if i am wrong, and people can explain why i'm wrong, but if their just going to keep claiming that i'm wrong without even giving a explaination about how/why then all that it amounts to is white noise, and the fact that a group rather then a individual is saying those things doesn't change how utterly worthless a oppinion without even any reasoning, evedence based or not, internally consistant or not, to back it up; now that reasoning may very well exist, and may very well not have any flaws in it while pointing our flaws in my reasoning, but there is no way to determine that if said reasoning is never brought into the conversation in the first place.
Honestly, and you say i'm rude? You are rude, for reasons.
tl:dr; claiming that you should believe people because you are probably wrong even if they can't explain why is how gaslighting works, and has thus lost all ligitamacy to me, so back up on your claim or back up onto something else.
