LogFAQs > #886883841

Kineth posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

Then bring the same complaint against the people in this thread spouting the same rhetoric that I was commenting on. You also didn't have to respond to what I said if you don't actually disagree with the point I was making. The "counterargument" I made to your reply was based on the understanding that you actually disagreed with me. But if you already don't actually disagree with me then what's the point? I'm not going to apologize for assuming that someone replying to me is arguing a different position.

Your "counterargument" was based on misinterpreting what I said, which is why it was necessary to respond. It's also why you shoulda used a similar response to what I suggested which was not an apology. It's simply recognizing what I actually said since that's how good conversation/dialogue generally goes.


It's even more ridiculous that you'd rather type all of that than 2 to 5 words.

Also, I feel no need to reassert that I don't support violent resolutions, especially given what I just said.

I'm typing "all that" instead of those "2 to 5 words" because I think what you're saying is ridiculous.

If it doesn't apply to you, then you didn't need to respond. You assumed you were included in a group of people I was commenting on, but I didn't specifically quote anyone. I was commenting on an idea. If that isn't your idea, then don't include yourself in that group and then feel the need to defend yourself against my comment.

So if you aren't expressing the idea that I'm criticizing, then don't include yourself in the group expressing that idea, only to defend yourself because of it, and then say that I'm the one who should admit he misinterpreted the situation.
---

PSN: kazukifafner