spemanig said:
"But in this case, you were quick to assu-" Stop. I already made it clear that I didn't assume Balrog lied. And it's not a spin. It's grammar. It makes my statement wholy unhasty, though I can agree that it was lazy. I don't have the time or the care to fact check every forum post I respond to when there is a communication tool available that absolves me from always needing to do that ala conditional statements. You said it yourself - I usually come up with counter arguments when I know when someone here is mistaken, like I just did at length in my previous post response to you. But there was no counter argument to make here, because I wasn't making that statement to make the argument that GOWTLOW was wrong about Balrog lying. In fact, once again, I never accused Balrog of lying at all. I was making the conditional statement to set up my primary statement, and the object of my response thread, which was that there was a cutscene in the gameplay shown of the new GoW, therefore it won't have what I wish to see in a video game but haven't seen yet. Proving, or even knowing, whether or not Balrog lied was irrelevant to the argument I was making, so I made that statement conditional and moved on, as should you right now. |
As I already said in a prior reply, whatever you say. ^_-







