I've never said clarification wouldn't be useful, i just don't see why you'd immediately focus on such a specific combination of assumptions. If i said "i like apples" and "i don't like apple pie", i wouldn't expect people to say i'm being contradictory. I could understand if they asked why i felt that way, but i'd be pretty confused if they skipped too "it seems like you're being contradictory".

You've right this conversation has gone round in circle, but I've already been the following speaker in this discussion. When I've repeated stuff it's because either you did, or because you claimed i believe something counter to what I've actually previously said. I just read through our discussion again now to double check, and i often even qualify when my response to a point is one i made earlier.

Blah is by its very definition a dismissive way of condensing text, and "fairyland" is outright mocking. I'd have thought you above interjecting mockery into a discussion, but if i'm wrong in that assumption then fine. Clearly my impression of you was inaccurate.

How can i explain myself any clearer than in my previous post? You mimic the model of summary i used there, so clearly it makes sense to you. If you disagree then fine, but i'm not aware of any simpler way of explaining it. If you have one then by all means show me, i'd love to see it so i can utilise it down the line.

Your example doesn't even match what you're arguing against, this is more akin to someone saying Ferraris are too fast then turning around and saying a Porsche drives at the right speed, both vehicles drive at similar speeds and so on which would make the statement contradictory. This is why clarification was asked it's not confusing on any manner what the posts said, to me it comes more across as you confusing yourself trying to read between some lines that aren't there.

Blah is also a common used phrase in the UK with many contexts, when explaining or bring up something to someone who already is aware of previous information it's not uncommon to say "Ok here's how it goes sort this out you know the usual blah blah..." the is nothing aggressive in that unless you yourself are looking for aggression. What ever impression you want to have is up to you but tbh if I get the impression that you're deliberately trying to go around in circles or refusing to clarify I'll highlight that in a blunt way if need be, you went on about assumptions yes then I responded with that he maybe should have clarified what he meant. After that you went off on your argument about assumptions like you're looking for some hidden meaning in the post as I mentioned above it's almost as if you're trying to read between lines that aren't even there.

When I asked you what it's all about you gave vague side stepping reply which further made it look like a deliberate attempt to be awkward, an easy way to be clear or even ask if you don't understand something. If your arguing that we aren't sure what variables he means so it's an assumption at this point and maybe he just prefers the form factor of Vita then yeah I agree with that in fact I already have which is why I brought up clarification to begin with, instead you've come up with a confusing angle that's not even clear on what you're trying to argue, tbh I think you've misread something somewhere.

It wasn't meant to be a perfect comparison, just an easy demonstration of another situation in which multiple assumptions can be made (and assumptions about those assumptions). That car example is contradictory from the start, since there's only 1 variable and it can be controlled for. You can drive slower, but you can't make the Switch smaller or stop apple pie being apple pie (bar adding a creative assortment of additives :p)

I live in the UK and i can't say I've ever seen it used outside of a "doesn't matter enough to be said" context, so i'm stuck with the actual definition. It seems a bit silly for you to claim i might be 'reading between the lines', given that's the foundation of your original argument (a desire for clarification hadn't been expressed at that point).

You've not answered by question. You wanted me to be clearer, so i condensed my point into an easy to read 3-point question/answer summary, a style you then replicated in response. How could it have been clearer?

The car analogy fits because much like someone can drive slower someone may use the Switch's portable mode with out the JCs attached and so on which would make size a non issue. In the original post an example of the variables of the switch and later an comparison image highlighted what I meant the are any lines to read between because he has to mean one of those variables after which clarification on which variable was asked, even before clarifaction the is no reading between any lines as the point was highlight clearly beforehand that size could come across as contradictory.

You condensed what is part of your argument and it doesn't match what you've been posting, you've brought up assumptions yes but that part was already answered long before you still haven't fully explained about how this means there being no contradiction and all and how the point was nullified. It just doesn't all tie in at all, if you can't explain it then that tells me you've been arguing some other point that either wasn't said, one you misinterpreted or mixed up an argument from someone else with mine. As it stands if we try to bring some context to the statement either he's talking about the variables of the Switch of which only one would fall into what he's saying or he means a personal preference of some sort which has already been adressed.

I see my pic was censored.

To make the Switch and Vita the same size, he has to change how the Switch works. You can call it an evolution, but playing with a separate controller and screen is obviously not the same thing as holding the entire device. If it was, Nintendo wouldn't bother giving the option. So detaching the JC solves part of the problem, but also changes the function and adds new variables. That's not a solution. With the cars, if speed specifically is his problem he can just drive them at the same speed. He can go faster/slower without changing anything else about the cars.

Fine, let's go back to the basics:

In your original post, you don't say more information is needed. You jump directly to "he's not making much sense with this statement". It's this jump that confused me. Here's why:

While i'd argue that context (him using the Vita as a reference) tells us in what form he's referring to the Switch, you'd be right in saying we can't be 100% certain. So, for the sake of argument, we start from the position that neither of us know in what form he's using the Switch, and neither of us know in what capacity size is a problem for him while it's in that form.

The forms he can be using it is:
- Hand held handheld: Without further information, this isn't a inherent contradiction.
- Tablet: Without further information, this isn't a inherent contradiction.

The things he could personally think it's "a bit too big" for (emphasis on "a bit"):
- Holding in his hands: This is never contradictory in any form. He's either using it as a hand held handheld, or it's not in his hands. As a hand held handheld, the Switch is literally larger. Certainly to a degree that "a bit" is a reasonable qualifier.

- For travel: If he's using his pockets, then it's not inherently contradictory as either a complete handheld or in pieces. In the former it's once again linearly larger, in the latter it's less convenient. In either situation, an individual considering it "a bit too big" is possible. To be contradictory, we have to either make a third assumption, this time about his pockets (lol), or for him to be using a bag to travel with his Switch.

- General preference: He can also simply prefer smaller screens. As previously mentioned, i felt this way about the iPad Air versus the standard model. Both might be equally comfortable to me, but i just prefer the denser work space. Yoko could feel this way about the Switch's screen; he might just in general feel it's "a bit too big".

Now we return to the original comment. Given even most of the above potential assumptions don't lead to a contradiction, what i found odd is that you immediately jump to a position that makes you believe "he's not making much sense with this statement". To further my confusion, none of the examples you yourself give are actually inherently contradictory. Ironically, you didn't give clarification. If Yoko said the Switch is massive and he can't even hold it, then sure, most of those examples would be viable contradictions even without further information. But he doesn't, he says "a bit". Not huge amounts, not even quite a lot, just "a bit". Given how significantly his qualifier changes what is and isn't reasonable, it was a consistently relevant point to bring up.

This is as clear and specific as i can be. I've read through it twice, and i don't see how it can be considered vague. Everything is specific and with the examples in the same comment. It's late (coming up to 3am) so i need to be jumping into bed, and then i'm away until the end of Saturday on business. I dislike long-gaps in discussions, so if this is somehow still not clear, i think we'll just have to agree to disagree. Have a nice night :)

Evolution of something does add solutions actually and added variables and functions don't really back what you're saying here because under some if size is his issue which the original statement goes on about then the would be some contradiction given that with some the devices are the same size, the function still remains the same playing games on the go. This would be no different then someone in their car adjusting their speed. Even if we go back to basics I've shown earliar that Vita and Switch without the JCs are the same size this part can't be argued and saying with out information and so on still does not give you any ground on that part in regards to arguing forms because the topic at hand is size and as the image shows Vita is even bigger in width in the comparison. This leaves the only variable that matches what he's saying which is when the JC is attached, your potential assumptions part also goes both ways because as I mentioned earliar he can have his preferences that's fine that doesn't mean the aren't contradictions in saying it's a bit too big to be a portable because in the practical sense it isn't.

At least this post actually explained how your comments link up and the stance, as said we'll agree to disagree.

His opinion doesn´t surprise me at all. You could find a N64 in the trash in his latest game, which caused some backlash that lead to the promise to patch it out, just to point out his obvious bias.

For research purposes and to give a fair assessment:

As for me, I prefer the size and feel of the Vita and you feel like you've achieved something after playing with it. Cuz you know, it's not the size that matters, it's the way you use it and get satisfaction out of it, right? right? 😐 The Switch would just be for bragging rights and for men/women who like to gaze at the size in my pants.

Just at the OP....

Who the fuck puts the system in a pocket like that? Joycons in one, tablet in the other. That's like if someone had a picture of a 3ds in their pocket with the charger hanging out along the ground or with the Circle pad pro attached to it :s