Hozzászólások - manunkind

thor77, you did not answer the question. since subplasma attacks are harmless, what exactly is your complaint?

ultimately, my motive is irrelevant, as is whether you believe i'm being honest about my motive. i can attack you for my torture chamber, for SE, for a task, for a quest, mistakenly, or merely out of spite - it's all legal. the question is why such a harmless attack bothers you so much.

i'm not asking the reason. the reason is moot since subplasma attacks are legal. they do not need to be justified. i'm asked the problem. since subplasma attacks are harmless, what exactly is your complaint?

ad nauseum. given that subplasmas are legal and harmless, what is your complaint?

enzio, fine, it's pedantic, but if you must have a number, my answer is 4. daily means at least 4 days. after 4 days, you can rationally hypothesize that it would continue, but you might be wrong. in the case of me attacking you in january, you would have been wrong since we know it ended after 4 days. that's why it's unwise to assume. and that's why hypothesize and assume are two different things.

when i attacked you in january, i only checked for your scarab the first time. then i attacked those same 5 targets for 4 days. i wasn't watching all that closely because subplasmas are harmless. so i ask yet again, given that subplasmas are legal and harmless, what is your complaint?

enzio, i have answered ad nauseum. there are no torture chamber gains for attacking you, just the same gains as attacking an inactive player. i made a mistake. if i attack you in the future, it will be on purpose.

catwoman "daily" suggests ongoing. we can debate how many is "ongoing, " but two is not ongoing. it would have to be more than a few. when you assume it will continue, and go premium to stop it, you cannot rationally claim that it would have continued based on your sample size of two.

but these are semantics. here is what matters: subplasmas are legal and harmless. given this, what is your complaint?

i've answered every question you've asked honestly, thoroughly, and repeatedly. my goodwill is waning. subplasmas are legal and harmless. your ongoing complaints are pointless.

we continue to bicker over nonsense. you listen only to respond. these are the simple facts to which you have no answer: subplasmas are legal and harmless.

catwoman, you are lost.

as you can see, different players have different philosophies about when to use subplasmas. here's the takeaway: they are legal and harmless. you can ignore than to no detriment. you have additional options, and the one so many of you seem to dismiss involves soft skills not game mechanics. and let me tell you, the endless complaints in this forum do not serve as a deterrent.

i spoke to my clanmate. she explained that low level targets are good for completing her quests. helpful to her and harmless to you seems like a pretty good deal to me.

she also indicated that she hit neo a grand total of twice (on 2/19 and 2/20). i would say that "daily" is not a accurate characterization of twice.

i do not target low level players. i settle for them when bigger torture chamber meals are unavailable. i am the bear, and you are the berries i eat until i can find a more sustainable meal.

i never imagined i'd have such need to use "ad nauseum" until now.

great, so are we done here?

i hope i can find the inner strength to carry on without your admiration.

ok, we're doing this. back to school.

an hypothesis and an assumption are both statements about what you think is happening. how they are used, however, is opposite. an hypothesis is stated with the intent to test it to determine if it is true. an assumption, on the other hand, is accepted as fact without further consideration.

when you have a prediction about what you think is happening, and you are provided information that that prediction is incorrect, and you continue to believe it anyway, you are wrong and willfully so. that's not a good place to be. that is where you are as you stick to your mistaken assumptions.

class dismissed.

speaking of lying, i never said enzio lied. i said i made a mistake.

gerald, enzio, "daily" suggests something is ongoing. "daily for four days total" is very different than "daily." regardless, it's all entirely legal. what is your complaint?

gerald, aside from enzio in january, who have i attacked with a scarab? did i hit you? no. did i hit catwoman? no. regardless, it's all entirely legal. what is your complaint?

you could play the game, you could quit the game, but you choose to linger complaining. toward what end? players i once attacked, like Fos and Khine, have earned my admiration. you have chosen a different path.

enzio, assume does not mean "suppose [sic] to be the case." you might want to crack open that dictionary.

"once a day for four days back in january and not since" is how i would put it. daily, constantly, etc. suggest it is ongoing.

Neo2022, i don't really want to get into a semantic debate with you about the meaning of the word assumption, but suffice it to say, just because you assume something doesn't make it true. for example, you are assuming how my clanmate will respond if you message her. you may be right or you may be wrong, but you can't know for sure until you find out.

enzio, "daily" could mean 2 or it could mean hundreds. i wasn't sure, so i asked for clarification. i try not to make assumptions. but i would say if the answer was 2, "daily" is misrepresenting the severity of what was endured.

maxhths, yes, i made a mistake with my recent attacks on enzio. how many times must i say that?

Neo2022, don't be like them.

Neo2022, i think we have a different understanding of the meaning of "assumption." did anyone mock you? no one suggested you beg. i suggested you try communicating.