| naruball said: No, I did re-read what you said. You were right about that. That's not the point. All you had to do was mention that, i.e. the 8 year reference, which is pretty much the same excuse that ps3 fans use over 360 (only in that case it's of course an excuse, not an argument). No need for the attitude of superiority, but that's the internet for ya. |
It's not superiority, it's me responding to your post in a way that was appropriate to your post's tone and attitude.
You ridiculed me for something that I hadn't actually said, and you did so by bolding part of a sentence and ignoring the stuff that gave the bolded part its context. I have no patience for people who extract parts of a sentence and then ridicule a person for that snippet without bothering to take their time to double-check that what was extracted is representative of what was being said.
Compare my attitude with you to my attitude with Yakuzaice. Yakuzaice took the time to read what I said, thought about it, and responded in a fairly reasonable manner, suggesting that there were disagreements on various points. You took half of a sentence that I said, and ridiculed me for it. Why should I give you the time necessary to actually explain myself a second time when you couldn't take enough time to read it through the first time? That's not entirely rhetorical, by the way - I want you to explain to me why I should give my time up in order to repeat something I'd already said, when you couldn't take enough time to read what I said the first time, and felt that ridicule was better than actually proposing a counterargument.
