[009]
RedViking
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
@24.7.96.92 - No, I saw your point about the logic just fine. But then you added the YouFailLogicForever bits at the end there which turned your explanation into a insult directed at me. When you\'re trying to convince someone to come around to your point of view, you\'re pretty much self-sabotaging your argument, hence my statement.
to:
@24.7.96.92 - No, I saw your point about the logic just fine. But then you added the YouFailLogicForever bits at the end there which turned your explanation into a insult directed at me. When you\\\'re trying to convince someone to come around to your point of view, you\\\'re pretty much self-sabotaging your argument when you insult them, hence my statement.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
@SomeGuy - Although I appreciate that you\'re trying to stop the argument, the only problem I can see with that suggestion is that integrating these explanations will just turn them into a huge WallOfText. My explanation above was several lines long and, so far, a consensus hasn\'t been reached. Won\'t that just increase the amount of {{Natter}} on the main page and just be counter productive?
to:
@SomeGuy - Although I appreciate that you\\\'re trying to stop the argument, my main concern is that integrating these explanations will just turn them into a huge WallOfText. My explanation above was several lines long and, so far, a consensus hasn\\\'t been reached. Won\\\'t that just increase the amount of {{Natter}} on the main page and just be counter productive?
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
@SomeGuy - Although I appreciate that you\'re trying to stop the argument, the only problem I can see with that suggestion is that integrating these explanations will just turn them into a huge WallOfText. My explanation above was several lines long and, so far, a consensus hasn\'t been reached. Won\'t that just increase the amount of {{Natter}} and just be counter productive?
to:
@SomeGuy - Although I appreciate that you\\\'re trying to stop the argument, the only problem I can see with that suggestion is that integrating these explanations will just turn them into a huge WallOfText. My explanation above was several lines long and, so far, a consensus hasn\\\'t been reached. Won\\\'t that just increase the amount of {{Natter}} on the main page and just be counter productive?
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
@SomeGuy - The only problem I can see with that suggestion is that integrating these explanations will just turn them into a huge WallOfText. My explanation above was several lines long and, so far, a consensus hasn\'t been reached. Won\'t that just increase the amount of {{Natter}} and just be counter productive?
to:
@SomeGuy - Although I appreciate that you\\\'re trying to stop the argument, the only problem I can see with that suggestion is that integrating these explanations will just turn them into a huge WallOfText. My explanation above was several lines long and, so far, a consensus hasn\\\'t been reached. Won\\\'t that just increase the amount of {{Natter}} and just be counter productive?
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
@SomeGuy - The only problem I can see with that suggestion is that integrating these explanations is that it\'ll just turn them into a huge WallOfText. My explanation above was several lines long and, so far, a consensus hasn\'t been reached. Won\'t that just increase the amount of {{Natter}} and just be counter productive?
to:
@SomeGuy - The only problem I can see with that suggestion is that integrating these explanations will just turn them into a huge WallOfText. My explanation above was several lines long and, so far, a consensus hasn\\\'t been reached. Won\\\'t that just increase the amount of {{Natter}} and just be counter productive?
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
The smuggled Lyrium is specifically used in a quest to ultimately feed the Templar\'s Lyrium addiction. Its only purpose is during that quest. A video game is, by definition, limited in scope because the Dev Team cannot program every single, conceivable action into the game. That\'s why tropes like TheDevTeamThinksOfEverything exist because they actually anticipated players doing a non-intuitive action and programed the eventuality into the game. In this case, the developers specifically intended for the TakeAThirdOption to be to go to the Circle and ask them for help. The smuggled Lyrium was specifically intended for for the Smuggled Lyrium quest. Furthermore, you have no way to prove one way or the other whether or not the Lyrium would have been enough, nor can you prove that blood magic could make up for any lack of Lyrium.
to:
The smuggled Lyrium is specifically used in a quest to ultimately feed the Templar\\\'s Lyrium addiction. Its only purpose is during that quest. A video game is, by definition, limited in scope because the Dev Team cannot program every single, conceivable action into the game. That\\\'s why tropes like TheDevTeamThinksOfEverything exist because they actually anticipated players doing a non-intuitive action and programed the eventuality into the game. In this case, the developers specifically intended for the TakeAThirdOption to be to go to the Circle and ask them for help. The smuggled Lyrium was specifically intended for for the Smuggled Lyrium quest. Furthermore, you have no way to prove one way or the other whether or not the Lyrium would have been enough, nor can you prove that the presence of the available Lyrium would have lessened the cost of the blood magic sacrifice.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
@24.7.96.92 - No, I saw your point about the logic just fine. But then you added the YouFailLogicForever bits at the end there which turned your explanation into a insult directed at me. When you\'re trying to convince someone to come around to your point of view, you\'re pretty much self-sabotaging your arguement, hence my statement.
to:
@24.7.96.92 - No, I saw your point about the logic just fine. But then you added the YouFailLogicForever bits at the end there which turned your explanation into a insult directed at me. When you\\\'re trying to convince someone to come around to your point of view, you\\\'re pretty much self-sabotaging your argument, hence my statement.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
@24.7.96.92 - No, I saw your point about the logic just fine. But then you added the YouFailLogicForever bits at the end there which turned your explanation into a insult directed at me. When you\'re trying to convince someone to come around to your point of view, your pretty much self-sabotaging your arguement, hence my statement.
to:
@24.7.96.92 - No, I saw your point about the logic just fine. But then you added the YouFailLogicForever bits at the end there which turned your explanation into a insult directed at me. When you\\\'re trying to convince someone to come around to your point of view, you\\\'re pretty much self-sabotaging your arguement, hence my statement.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
@24.7.96.92 - No, I saw your point about the logic just fine. But then you added the YouFailLogicForever bits at the end there which turned your explanation into a insult directed at me. When you\'re trying to convince someone to come around to your point of view, insulting them is pretty much akin to self-sabotage, hence my statement.
to:
@24.7.96.92 - No, I saw your point about the logic just fine. But then you added the YouFailLogicForever bits at the end there which turned your explanation into a insult directed at me. When you\\\'re trying to convince someone to come around to your point of view, your pretty much self-sabotaging your arguement, hence my statement.
