• We're looking for artists. Direct message Dr. Watson for more info!

Game Ranked Wrestling Wars Mafia

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
Ratchet said:
More nonsense. I told you, that I don't need to answer about what his possible motive could be, because there may simply not be one. That is already highlighting the possibility of a contradiction. I gave you this answer, and you responded with your usual vapid bluster about focusing on worthwhile discussions over worthless ones. Now you bring up the possibility that it was a contradiction as if I hadn't been saying that was in play from the very start. So we can completely throw away the last sentence.

My response implied that because your demand for a motive carries the assumption that it must be calculated (and it obviously makes little sense to be calculated, though there exist some possibilities in play there - no, I'm not going to list them out). Any more of this garbage or are we done for now?
Click to expand...

If your position is that you can't assume motive for someone's play (This is a strange prior, but for Ekko I could see taking everything with a grain of salt), then what are you looking to accomplish here, exactly?

This is probably why several players have noted this interaction as being weird because it's not at all obvious what you're doing, why you're voting him, and so on. If *this* is worthless, what isn't?

I'll stop asking you questions to generate meaningful content out of your slot when you start providing them without needing to be poked with a stick.
 
very defensive posture here ratchet lol I mean the first post from ultra in this exchange didn't seem like he was suspecting you but more trying to engage in discussion about ekko's motives? yeah it seems he is a bit sus now from your responses but you were defensive from the get go
 
Serious question from me here, how do you guys tell 'flavor' in something like WWF/WWE/WEC/etc...style sports wrestling?
 
CraigPelton said:
Wrestlers play characters with histories, relationships, motivations, etc. It's no different than any other theme really
Click to expand...

What you mean by "play" ?

crying-still.gif
 
Ultra said:
If your position is that you can't assume motive for someone's play (This is a strange prior, but for Ekko I could see taking everything with a grain of salt), then what are you looking to accomplish here, exactly?
Click to expand...
1 - Not what I said, as you know, but here we go again. My position was, I don't ned to assume that there is a motive for him to be unduly defensive of a player. That. is. it. Comprende?
2 - It being Ekko goes double for this, yes.
3 - What *I* wanted to accomplish was point out that his comment around X was unduly defensive. You then wanted me to come up with a motive for him to do so despite having his vote on him. Not my concern - I explained why. Then, because you can't help but to argue in bad faith, you circle back to the absence of motive being a contradiction as if I hadn't already noted that motive could be absent in the first place, precisely because, he is capable of contradicting himself! It's like, the whole point I explained back to you in my first response. Now you are again spinning it back onto me as if I'm the one seeking pointless discourse. I don't have anything to discuss with you on this, it's clearly not worth any length of time spent on it, and I'm repeating myself at this point besides.
Ultra said:
This is probably why several players have noted this interaction as being weird
Click to expand...
What you are talking about and what they are talking about, are two different things.
CraigPelton said:
very defensive posture here ratchet lol I mean the first post from ultra in this exchange didn't seem like he was suspecting you but more trying to engage in discussion about ekko's motives? yeah it seems he is a bit sus now from your responses but you were defensive from the get go
Click to expand...
I'm not at all interested in discussing with him. I will get absolutely nothing from it. It's not defensive, not even close - it's dismissive.
 
i will say tho ultra ur expectations r kind of unrealistic bc thread dead af idk how u expect ratchet to give out content without being poked for it

I'm getting bored just talking in the thread lol
 
Ratchet said:
1 - Not what I said, as you know, but here we go again. My position was, I don't ned to assume that there is a motive for him to be unduly defensive of a player. That. is. it. Comprende?
2 - It being Ekko goes double for this, yes.
3 - What *I* wanted to accomplish was point out that his comment around X was unduly defensive. You then wanted me to come up with a motive for him to do so despite having his vote on him. Not my concern - I explained why. Then, because you can't help but to argue in bad faith, you circle back to the absence of motive being a contradiction as if I hadn't already noted that motive could be absent in the first place, precisely because, he is capable of contradicting himself! It's like, the whole point I explained back to you in my first response. Now you are again spinning it back onto me as if I'm the one seeking pointless discourse. I don't have anything to discuss with you on this, it's clearly not worth any length of time spent on it, and I'm repeating myself at this point besides.
What you are talking about and what they are talking about, are two different things.
I'm not at all interested in discussing with him. I will get absolutely nothing from it. It's not defensive, not even close - it's dismissive.
Click to expand...

Wow, you're inefficient.
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top