Sure thing bro.

Curl 6 said that the amount of fans that disagreed with the OP showed that they were not blindly loyal.  You said "nope" as in you were disagreeing. That would indicate you held the opposite opinion, as in this thread somehow shows that the fanbase is blindly loyal.

To give support to your position, you said that the OPs opinions was extreme.  So, then, the thread shows that Nintendo fans are blindly loyal, because of the OP's position, and the people disagreeing with him are apparently irrelevant.


Feel free to correct yourself if you don't have that view, but you clearly expressed it.

So many assumptions, it's not even funny. Seriously. Not even funny.

I argued clearly that you cannot draw a general conclusion that the fanbase is not blindly loyal (i.e. it may be blindly loyay, it may not be blindly loyal, but this piece of information is not enough to support either view).

Feel free to apologize for making assumptions instead of sticking to what I said.

Awfully prickly.

I'm not going to waste time arguing about what you meant.  But, if you don't want people making assumptions about what you said, be clear in your language.  If you think "nope" is enough to clearly establish that you meant "you cannot draw a general conclusion but this piece of evidence is not enough to support either view", then you should say something like "this piece of evidence is not enough to support either view".  

I'm sorry if you expected me to understand what you meant based on "nope" and "OP is extreme".  

Then you should have read the rest of my posts instead of jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about what I said.

No, I shouldn't have.  I read what you wrote, and interpreted it to the best of my capabilities, in what I think was a justified interpretation. Then, I asked you to explain it.  Instead of just saying, "what I actually meant was..." you got defensive about it.  And, for some reason, you thought me interpreting your post wrong (whether I was justified in doing so or not) was so offensive that it demanded an apology... which baffles me.

But, I did look through the topic again (I had looked through it before and I guess I missed it), and apparently Curl thought the exact same thing when reading your initial post.  When he pointed it out, you again accused him of a strawman argument instead of clarifying yourself.  So, either we're both very poor readers, or you did a bad job at expressing your opinion.  Since 2 people interpretted it that way, the fault more likely lies with you.  

In the future, you should probably express yourself clearly in the first place.  And if someone thinks you meant something different, instead of accusing them of trying to put words in yourmouth and thereby starting an argument, you should entertain the possibility that they may have genuinely misunderstood you, and clarify yourself.  It would have saved you two incredibly pointless arguments.