5
Kay Wolf, on 09 November 2011 - 09:26 PM, said:
My constant beef with Aegis is that I came up with a perfectly viable option for dealing with honor violations and dishonorable battlefield conduct -being programmed into the game- and, rather than attempting to discuss it, or even to give an easy road toward having a decent debate, he hammered the dog **** out of me, trying to tell me I was trying to speak for the entire community, that I was trying to set moral standards for everyone, trying to speak for everyone, when I was only citing how the community used to be and believe and act while in the MW2: Mercs and early MW3 period of on-line gaming through Kali/NetMech, Mplayer, and other places the various leagues played, and attempting to state the most likely reaction of twitcher community players and veterans if an honor system wasn't established.
To be honest, I now believe he was either A) trying to force his moral code on me, trying to express that anarchy was the only way to have a community, or B ) trying to bait me into further arguments, rather than having a nice, legitimate discussion as I've seen him have with several others on this forum.
I felt he was a level-headed fella, as well, until the only thing he would do with any manner of discussion about honor in the game was to deride it, to denigrate me, and anyone who agreed with me, about having some manner of honor system. Every single explanation I attempted to come up with he negated without giving it a decent amount of effort toward any manner of potential legitimacy whatsoever. So, now, since any discussion of honor or morals that might come up is likely, invariably, to be tainted by the level of ignorance I saw in that debate from him, I warn others to avoid those types of conversations, period, even if he's not been part of the discussion thus far.
Don't worry, as the coming week wears on, I will likely cool it with references to him. I have, after all, set him on my ignore list, and for more reason, and a stronger legitimate reason, than just 'losing' a debate to him, if you or anyone else desires to call it that. See, I do not mind, in the least, a spirited debate, but not one that went to the level of ignorance -and I was to blame as well because of the fact that every time I came up with a potential explanation he might wrap his head around, he shat on it for NO GOOD REASON, failing to even attempt to discuss it reasonably- that one did, and it made me angry, so if I can be baited by the troll well enough that I could lose my place on these forums through someone's ban stick, it's time for me to let him be who he is, and I will be who I am. An apology will not help this situation, I am too stubborn to ask for one and, since his moral compass is obviously horribly skewed I likely wouldn't get one, anyway, because we would end up in another discussion down the road where our diametric opposition would become the focal point of another firestorm. Thus it is better for him to remain on my ignore list.
Fair enough? Have a good evening.
To be honest, I now believe he was either A) trying to force his moral code on me, trying to express that anarchy was the only way to have a community, or B ) trying to bait me into further arguments, rather than having a nice, legitimate discussion as I've seen him have with several others on this forum.
I felt he was a level-headed fella, as well, until the only thing he would do with any manner of discussion about honor in the game was to deride it, to denigrate me, and anyone who agreed with me, about having some manner of honor system. Every single explanation I attempted to come up with he negated without giving it a decent amount of effort toward any manner of potential legitimacy whatsoever. So, now, since any discussion of honor or morals that might come up is likely, invariably, to be tainted by the level of ignorance I saw in that debate from him, I warn others to avoid those types of conversations, period, even if he's not been part of the discussion thus far.
Don't worry, as the coming week wears on, I will likely cool it with references to him. I have, after all, set him on my ignore list, and for more reason, and a stronger legitimate reason, than just 'losing' a debate to him, if you or anyone else desires to call it that. See, I do not mind, in the least, a spirited debate, but not one that went to the level of ignorance -and I was to blame as well because of the fact that every time I came up with a potential explanation he might wrap his head around, he shat on it for NO GOOD REASON, failing to even attempt to discuss it reasonably- that one did, and it made me angry, so if I can be baited by the troll well enough that I could lose my place on these forums through someone's ban stick, it's time for me to let him be who he is, and I will be who I am. An apology will not help this situation, I am too stubborn to ask for one and, since his moral compass is obviously horribly skewed I likely wouldn't get one, anyway, because we would end up in another discussion down the road where our diametric opposition would become the focal point of another firestorm. Thus it is better for him to remain on my ignore list.
Fair enough? Have a good evening.
So he disagrees with you about personal moral codes and adding mechanics to serve either one of you.
Edited by Cake Bandit, 09 November 2011 - 10:05 PM.
