Post your reason why you hate doing labs.
" Mikrotherion wrote I get that now. My advice is to get a thicker skin....... Oh at one point you said that you don't see that you are not seeing clearly and the next point you said that you "I get it now". Could you be more consistent with your argument or at least stop being so hypocritical? So if you finally get it now as shown below then please agree that you did not see clearly in the first place and you are the one who misunderstood? Thank you. Yep I say that you are constantly dodging my questions and arguments and I will not compile a list of the arguments/questions that you dodged just because you said so but because I don't take instructions from you. But, if you're interested so why not you do it the way round and instead, YOU go back and check up all the replies/comments/arguments that I have made and filtered out which arguments/questions that you dodged intentionally. But be honest and man enough to own up, that's the criteria. And if you seriously think that you are not dodging, then let me expose you again by just quoting you one example that you dodged. Please take a look at the time you made this post and the time the post that I quoted was made. https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1911005/page/8 >>>>page 8 see my latest post and the time the post was made? Where is your reply in that thread? You are not not dodging seriously please give me a break lol. If you're not dodging, then go back to that thread and make your reply there. Just one question. Why did you abandon that thread, the thread which you first started the argument with me, and came to this thread instead and started another different argument? Was it because you felt humiliated in that thread after your ignorance was exposed and thus switching to this thread to attack my arguments in a cleaner environment would boost your winning chances? Please note that when i say cleaner environment, I am not really saying the environment is really clean or hygienic. I am referring to an un-humiliated thread for you to start your argument. You know its damn hard to communicate to a person who have trouble understanding English. I know you will say that you are german and English isn't your first language blah blah blah excuses again just like did every time you misunderstood something and are exposed in past threads but did you notice that most misunderstandings arises because you failed to interpret correctly? Just take it for example the word "attack". It's true that I used the word attack but i was referring to an "attack on arguments" which does not mean physically attacking someone which you have misinterpreted it as shown in the arguments below and associated it with "WAR". And if you have noticed, i spend more time elaborating the meaning of certain words that I have used... That's because I realized that you don't even know the meaning of certain simple English words. Just a word of advice, best you refer to life lesson number 1 that I have created. Feeling humiliated and switching to different thread to attack the other person in whichever thread he makes in a clean environment, in an attempt to boost your winning chances? LOL.>>>>>> sounds familiar? this is another questions that you dodged btw. Mikrotherion wrote That was really not the reason, but whatever. The reason was that even though I asked you to re-read page 4 (which turned out to be page 3 after all, shame on me), you failed to see that I was not attacking you. So I tried to spell it out for you, if not letter by letter then in really manageable chunks. Mikrotherion wrote I get that now. My advice is to get a thicker skin.......>>>> as shown below Sorry, you are attacking my arguments and you have admitted it already that you finally understood. Your argument above is outdated maybe you should update it since you already get the idea on why I considered your comments an attack on my argument. Mikrotherion wrote Why would I need to explain it if it is there (at the time of writing this on page 3) plainly visible. If anyone cared to go back and look it up. Do you really think anyone is reading our drivel? People who come to this your thread you're so willingly derailing will just skip anything that was posted by you or me (after this debate started), probably even most of the more on-topic replies, since this thread simply asks for "Your Reasons why you hate the lab." - so it's actually enough to pop in, write down the list of stuff you hate, and leave. Since you did not get that my quoting of adghar was not an attack on you, I felt the need to explain it. Something I didn't deem necessary before, just because it needs a special mindset to read an attack into this and I would have thought reading it again might suffice. Mikrotherion wrote I get that now. My advice is to get a thicker skin.......>>>> as shown below Oh so you assume that people would understand what you mean especially if your English is so broken? Sorry, its an attack on my argument. Since you have acknowledge it already that you finally understood why I consider it an attack on my argument, could you go and update your words so as that there won't be any hypocrisy in your comments? Mikrotherion wrote That's not a fact. I did not know nothing about logical fallacies. I was wrong in one point, I conceded that I was wrong there and that my tongue-in-cheek remark (whether something was a logical fallacy if the conclusion was correct but the no evidence as to its correctness was provided) wasn't funny, after all. So be it. It is not relevant here at all. Enough of your lies please. Just ask yourself one simple question. If you have understood the meaning of logical fallacies in the first place, would you have used the wrong arguments and made the wrong comments, only to be exposed? FACT IS that you do not know the meaning of it, and pretended to know it, and subsequently make arguments that are so irrelevant that it became so awfully clear that you really know nothing about it. Mikrotherion wrote I hear you. :P Since you have heard me, then please stop making this kind of small but important mistakes. If I have trusted you and look at page 4 instead, then I would have made another different argument so please open your eyes wider. It's so tiring to repeat my points over and over again just because you have selective reading or have comprehension problems. Mikrotherion wrote Please provide evidence that I've come to ALL the threads that you made. But I admit that I like coming to your threads. However, I do not always attack (which is a bit of a strong word, since arguing something you said hardly an attack) you or your threads. "Making arguments" - now, there's a surprise, discussion in a forum called general discussion... o tempora, o mores! LMAO I am not going back and dig up all the records and present it to you just because you said so, and if you're so interested to prove your innocence then why don't you dig back all those records and provide evidence of your innocence? Sorry, I just don't take instructions from you. Nah, its not a strong word, instead, you are just too sensitive. Mikrotherion wrote 1. We're only talking about what I said to adghar so far. I would like to point out that I even contributed to the thread pointing out why I used to hate the lab. 2. I agreed with you that adghar's post was irrelevant and that after posting such an irrelevant post he should not be surprised at your sarcastic remark. Sorry i would also like to point out that even though a person has made relevant replies, he could also add hidden provoking comments or arguments as well. There are people who made replies that appear to "help" but their real intention was to provoke or argue ultimately. It's just like "person A" came to "person B's" thread and started an argument with person B and when when person A gets humiliated or his lies exposed he came to another different thread of person B to make some comments again. The comments Person A made contains some relevant points in response to Person B's topic but it also contains hidden provoking comments. The ultimate aim of Person A's action was because he wants to start another argument with Person B again but in a new thread because its an "un-humiliated" thread. Mikrotherion wrote I get that now. My advice is to get a thicker skin. In fact, what I did say was that it is ok ("fine" is what I really said) to like the lab, and that I can't forbid people to come to this thread and post it here (since I am no moderator nor owner of these forums) - but that he should not be surprised at the consequences, i.e. being told off for posting irrelevant stuff. That is me agreeing with you. Why do you take so long to fully comprehend that or do you really have selective reading problems? Just take a look at this phrase on pg 7 on this thread, You attacked my post by implying what I have said was wrong and I perceived it as a direct challenge. Is it not obvious enough for you to understand? Now take a look at this phrase again from pg 9 And you made a post saying that it is "ok" to post that you like the labs which totally implies that I am wrong and I saw it as a direct attack on my arguments You seriously need people to repeat themselves multiple times before you can absorb that information. Its really tiring you know and this "confusion" of yours will not have happened if you really know how to read properly. My advice for you is to go and brush up your English language proficiency before you start any argument with them. Mikrotherion wrote Please, never consider becoming head of whatever country you live in. War might be inevitable. If you take offense so easily and then refuse to accept that you actually haven't been attacked, there's not much that can be done, really. Oh so is that what you do best? When you have misunderstood other people due to your own language incompetence, you create another rubbish comment to make it look like the fault lies with the other person? . Mikrotherion wrote Perhaps you should lol less and think more. You're asking who I am to say that you were not attacked... well, gee, I am the alleged attacker. I am not aware of an attack - and yes, this my opinion is very important, since I should know my intentions best. I also went to the trouble of a lengthy explanation why it was not an attack, since I cannot, as you stated, read your mind. Thus it didn't even cross my mind that what I wrote could be taken as an offense. Wow, looks like I really need your permission and approval first before I can make any comments. Just Bravo !!!! Do you know how to detect sarcasm by the way? I am afraid the English dictionary does not really help you to detect sarcasm. Of course it didn't cross your mind what you wrote could be taken as an offense. Do you know why? Let me tell you why. Just take a look at this phrase on pg 7 of this thread, You on the other hand came in and said that it is "ok" to say that you like the lab in a topic which was created to discuss why you hate the lab. Your words implies that I am wrong and that's why i see it as an attack on me. >>>> i already explained Now take a look at this phrase again from pg 9 of this thread And you made a post saying that it is "ok" to post that you like the labs which totally implies that I am wrong and I saw it as a direct attack on my arguments >>>> i explained AGAIN I have to explain 2 times before you actually get the meaning of it and those 2 sentences have the same meaning but slight differences and you on the other hand is not able to grasp the idea of it. You only understood pg 9 but you failed to understand pg 7. This has only 2 possibilities. Possible reason one > You simply ignored page 7 explanation or you have selective reading Possible reason two > You do not know that the explanation in pg 7 is equivalent to pg 9's explanation . Mikrotherion wrote I would think it is, yet you took offense at me not forbidding adghar to come here and post irrelevant stuff. (See above) Seriously do you know what you are saying? Previously, you stated that you finally get the reason why I took offense at your comments now you're saying another different thing. Do you truly understand or are you just pretending to understand? Mikrotherion wrote And we're back to square 1. :D You can't know my real intentions. You complained that I did not explain my claims, yet whenever I do explain, you call it lies, excuses or sugar-coating. That's because it really is. And I have already explained why i call it lies. As a recap, see below. I noticed that you made arguments for every point except for this. Why? Because it was caught red handed..... ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Mikrotherion wrote What? You want me to admit it again? Fine, I tried to make a joke with your post and turns out the joke's on me. Now, is it coincidence? Not at all. I quoted one of your posts and tried (and failed) to make a joke of it. OHHHHHHHHH. Now you're singing a different tune, and this time, a honest tune FINALLY. The phrase, "and turns out the joke's on me" makes a whole world of difference between the initial reply that you gave. There is a whole world of difference between "quoted one of your posts and tried (and failed) to make a joke of it " and "I tried to make a joke with your post and turns out the joke's on me" .. However, you should add the phrase " due to my ignorance" behind the underlined sentences above. That would be a more truthful representation. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Mikrotherion wrote And you think it is completely impossible that I have learned from my mistake? I can tell you I hate making mistakes and when I do make one, I try to make sure I won't do it again. And again, the fact that I made a mistake is no basis for arguing that I am wrong here. This is a logical fallacy called Whataboutism. And it is even less a carte blanche for you, meaning that because in a different discussion I made a mistake, you cannot possibly be wrong in any discussions following that one. Sorry you never learn. What I noticed is that you like to talk big but in fact you know nothing about it. Not just from this case whereby you pretended to know something when in fact you know nothing and ended up making yourself look like a joke, it also happens in past encounters whereby you ended up apologizing. Let me just tell you this cold hard truth. A person isn't qualified to educate people on things which he or she does not know of, especially, from a person who has a past history of talking shit out his mouth. Not saying it is you specifically, but can you get the idea? Mikrotherion wrote It would be nice to have some people read the post in question and judge whether it was an attack. Hopefully, its not your friends for sure. Mikrotherion wrote Why, it's me, your friend Mikrotherion. Well you mentioned and gave me an advice to have a thicker skin. Now I guess you seriously have a very think skin. Mikrotherion wrote I was not implying. I was explicitly (that's the exact opposite) saying I was the ultimate authority on that matter (i.e. whether I was trying to make a joke); it was me who wrote it and I know my intention. Just OMG.... It's just too tiring explaining to you when you have trouble understanding English.. As this is the last few points of your argument, i shall not bother giving you a detailed explanation like i have given above. Please go back and refer to what I have said and think MORE. Mikrotherion wrote The reason does not have to be hate. I really don't hate you. If we met on the street (knowing who we are), I wouldn't punch you, try to kill you or anything that could be associated with hate. I find our debates fascinating. How can i ever trust a person who says one thing but means another thing instead as seen and proven in this thread. Sorry I don't trust hypocrites generally. Oh btw, are you threatening me? LMAO Mikrotherion wrote Just look up "You don't say!" in a phrase book. For your convenience: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you_don%27t_say Still does not change the fact that you tried to rephrase the words to your advantage. For more explanation just take a look at the cut and paste argument below. ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Mikrotherion wrote>>>> this is from page 9 of your confession to your mistake What? You want me to admit it again? Fine, I tried to make a joke with your post and turns out the joke's on me. Mikrotherion wrote >>>>this is from page 6 of your confession to your mistake Now, is it coincidence? Not at all. I quoted one of your posts and tried (and failed) to make a joke of it. Notice the way you phrase it? Both has entirely different meanings. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// OHHHHHHHHH. Now you're singing a different tune, and this time, a honest tune FINALLY. The phrase, "and turns out the joke's on me" makes a whole world of difference between the initial reply that you gave. There is a whole world of difference between "quoted one of your posts and tried (and failed) to make a joke of it " and "I tried to make a joke with your post and turns out the joke's on me" .. However, you should add the phrase " due to my ignorance" behind the underlined sentences above. That would be a more truthful representation. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Last edited by YoursTruly86 on Jun 18, 2017, 11:03:23 AM
|
|
|
I don't get it why don't you take it to pm? So that actual purpose of this thread may survive, regardless if someone likes or dislikes lab or in this case, each other.
Spreading salt since 2006
| |
|
The thin line between love and hate... Or better yet. What is love? Baby dont hurt me dont hurt me no more.
|
|
" Well, you don't understand bro. That PERSON A has a long history with me. He is incredibly persistent to the extend that he is incredibly annoying. He appears in almost every thread that I have made and intentionally would start an argument with me. Worse, he talks big most of the time in the English language when in fact he knows nothing about the topic and does not possess the language proficiency to interpret other people words properly. Much of the misunderstanding arises because he failed to interpret other people's word properly and had used the wrong choice of words to convey his intentions, which resulted in greater confusion between both parties. In fact, English isn't his first language and he's German. And when his argument is exposed, he ends up apologizing only when he is left with no choice because the quotes are all captured and there is no way of denying it. His apologies was made in a non-genuine and reluctant manner. Besides that, this person has a very shameless habit of rephrasing other people's word and sugar coating it to his advantage and at the same time, hide his exposed flaws. This is my opinion of PERSON A. Last edited by YoursTruly86 on Jun 18, 2017, 12:05:43 PM
|
|
|
Another absolutely top quality YoursTruly86 thread, good work
Last edited by RandallPOE on Jun 18, 2017, 12:10:57 PM
|
|
|
Getting back on topic, the reason why I hate labs is generally the combination of traps and door opening puzzles. I think just removing those pesky door levers would do it for me. The length is ok. I would like to see some sort of checkpoint system, where you can come back to each area directly after killing Izaro. I do think that whoever starts the lab should be the only ones to finish it meaning that nobody can be rushed to the end. I am probably opposite most players as I enjoy the most linear content possible in game. My two favorite things to do are and ledge based run(strands) and uber Atziri runs. I cannot stand puzzles in an arpg. I have tomb raider for that.
Peace ~old |
|
|
Yes, back on topic please, leave love/hate debate for the countless other threads that spread on these forums like a bad bacterial infection.
For me, I love the lab, but I do have some hates. My top 5... 1.) I hate Gold Doors and Gold Keys. If the map is supposed to be longer, make it longer, but don't make us backtrack. 2.) Make gauntlets of traps smaller. Don't hide portions of a set of traps by having them exist past one screen UNLESS there are obvious safe spots ot rest (pppst: safe spots should not contain sentinel traps). This really annoys me. I can run any trap gauntlet if I can plan out the timing in advance, but making me frantically dart around on the fly is way more aggravating than it is fun. 3.) Lab trials for uber lab. I eventually find them all, but this process is tedious, and you have countless people in guild or global 820 chat spamming about it: "free lingering pain", "LF crippling grief". Sooner or later it sounds like all PoE players are morbidly depressed masochists. My proposed solution: until you complete them all, incrementally increase chance of finding the trials you need. 4.) Instance timer. Make the entire lab one instance. If I enjoy the lab and spend time clearing maps, don't make a previous area expire on me. Usually I don't bother clearing lab, but sometimes I'm in the mode and have the time to completely enjoy it. 5.) Don't make it a one-time-only visit. Real life happens, and if the servers go down, or if I get a trade request while in the lab, let me return and not lose my progress. This also makes collecting all my loot a pain, as I have to dump everything worthwhile I find into stash tabs instead of selling it off. If you want this experience to be hardcore, then prevent re-entry on death, but allow re-entry otherwise. For most, but not all trap situations, it's tough for hardcore players to use whatever means of insta-logout they perform (whether against GGG ToS or not). So please don't hide behind that excuse. ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▒▒▒▒░░░░░ cipher_nemo ░░░░░▒▒▒▒ │ Waggro Level: ♠○○○○ │ 1244 ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ Last edited by cipher_nemo on Jun 18, 2017, 1:25:23 PM
|
|
" Oh at one point you said that you don't see that you are not seeing clearly and the next point you said that you "I get it now". Could you be more consistent with your argument or at least stop being so hypocritical? So if you finally get it now as shown below then please agree that you did not see clearly in the first place and you are the one who misunderstood? Thank you. Well, if you say I was the one who wasn't seeing clearly, then clearly I couldn't clearly see that I wasn't seeing clearly? Clear so far? So let's keep it that way: I posted in thread, contributing to the topic at hand and also agreeing with you that what adghar posted was irrelevant to this thread. How anyone could take offense at that was and still is beyond me, but I do get that somehow you did take offense, you explained it often enough. Yep I say that you are constantly dodging my questions and arguments and I will not compile a list of the arguments/questions that you dodged just because you said so but because I don't take instructions from you. But, if you're interested so why not you do it the way round and instead, YOU go back and check up all the replies/comments/arguments that I have made and filtered out which arguments/questions that you dodged intentionally. But be honest and man enough to own up, that's the criteria. And if you seriously think that you are not dodging, then let me expose you again by just quoting you one example that you dodged. Please take a look at the time you made this post and the time the post that I quoted was made. https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1911005/page/8 >>>>page 8 see my latest post and the time the post was made? Where is your reply in that thread? You are not not dodging seriously please give me a break lol. If you're not dodging, then go back to that thread and make your reply there. Just one question. Why did you abandon that thread, the thread which you first started the argument with me, and came to this thread instead and started another different argument? Was it because you felt humiliated in that thread after your ignorance was exposed and thus switching to this thread to attack my arguments in a cleaner environment would boost your winning chances? I was asked to let that other thread die, since it was a dumb troll thread that deserves to and every reply would just bump it. I'll get your last post from the other thread over to here and reply to it. As for the other questions you said I dodged -since you want answers from me you think you haven't already got, it's your job to provide the questions in question (hah). If you choose not to do that, that's your decision. Please note that when i say cleaner environment, I am not really saying the environment is really clean or hygienic. Why not? It should actually be sterile since it is immaterial. I am referring to an un-humiliated thread for you to start your argument. I did not start an argument. I added to your thread (this should be allowed) and I also explained to adghar that he was wrong, that this a not a thread to post your opinion about the labyrinth, but reasons to hate it. You were offended by that post, I explained why there was no reason to be offended, but that was not enough for you. You refer to things from other threads that are totally irrelevant here, so I reply to some of that stuff as well and you totally derail your own thread. You know its damn hard to communicate to a person who have trouble understanding English. You don't say! Fortunately, I don't have trouble understanding English. Am I perfect? Far from it. Are you perfect? Not at all. Language itself is not perfect. Misunderstandings happen. I have misunderstood things in the past and I certainly will in the future, as regrettable as that is. You have misunderstood things in the past and you will in the future. One of the things you misunderstood recently was reading offense into my post on page 3. I know you will say that you are german and English isn't your first language Just take it for example the word "attack". It's true that I used the word attack but i was referring to an "attack on arguments" which does not mean physically attacking someone which you have misinterpreted it as shown in the arguments below and associated it with "WAR". No, I'm fully aware what sort of attack you meant. The person misinterpreting here is you. So read again, perhaps you'll understand. Feeling humiliated and switching to different thread to attack the other person in whichever thread he makes in a clean environment, in an attempt to boost your winning chances? LOL.>>>>>> sounds familiar? this is another questions that you dodged btw. Since there was no attack, I chose not to reply directly. Instead I have put considerable effort now in explaining that there was no attack, so that you might realize that the question is rendered moot. Mikrotherion wrote That was really not the reason, but whatever. The reason was that even though I asked you to re-read page 4 (which turned out to be page 3 after all, shame on me), you failed to see that I was not attacking you. So I tried to spell it out for you, if not letter by letter then in really manageable chunks. Mikrotherion wrote I get that now. My advice is to get a thicker skin. Sorry, you are attacking my arguments and you have admitted it already that you finally understood. Your argument above is outdated maybe you should update it since you already get the idea on why I considered your comments an attack on my argument. Yes, I understand that you thought I attacked you because you did not understand my post and thought I was attacking you with it. As explained, it was not meant as an attack. That you felt offended by it in the first place is still baffling and my advice was, since you seem to be so sensitive, to get a thicker skin. Mikrotherion wrote Why would I need to explain it if it is there (at the time of writing this on page 3) plainly visible. If anyone cared to go back and look it up. Do you really think anyone is reading our drivel? People who come to this your thread you're so willingly derailing will just skip anything that was posted by you or me (after this debate started), probably even most of the more on-topic replies, since this thread simply asks for "Your Reasons why you hate the lab." - so it's actually enough to pop in, write down the list of stuff you hate, and leave. Since you did not get that my quoting of adghar was not an attack on you, I felt the need to explain it. Something I didn't deem necessary before, just because it needs a special mindset to read an attack into this and I would have thought reading it again might suffice. Oh so you assume that people would understand what you mean especially if your English is so broken? Sorry, its an attack on my argument. Since you have acknowledge it already that you finally understood why I consider it an attack on my argument, could you go and update your words so as that there won't be any hypocrisy in your comments? If you think my English is broken, your perception is horribly skewed. And again, I don't understand why you consider my post an attack, only that you obviously do and do not understand that it was not. One thing that should make you think: I can't remember anyone else in the past 15 years who has ever called my English broken or had trouble understanding me. Mikrotherion wrote That's not a fact. I did not know nothing about logical fallacies. I was wrong in one point, I conceded that I was wrong there and that my tongue-in-cheek remark (whether something was a logical fallacy if the conclusion was correct but the no evidence as to its correctness was provided) wasn't funny, after all. So be it. It is not relevant here at all. Enough of your lies please. Just ask yourself one simple question. If you have understood the meaning of logical fallacies in the first place, would you have used the wrong arguments and made the wrong comments, only to be exposed? FACT IS that you do not know the meaning of it, and pretended to know it, and subsequently make arguments that are so irrelevant that it became so awfully clear that you really know nothing about it. You do have trouble understanding, don't you. Maybe not the meaning of words, but surely thing like tenses. I already admitted (and look, I'm repeating it) that I was unaware that a statement in order to be called a logical fallacy does not necessarily have to be wrong. Due to that unawareness of mine, I tried to make a joke asking whether it could be called a Just Because Fallacy even if what was stated using that fallacy was correct. Turned out yes (and there's also the Fallacy fallacy - meaning statement is not wrong on only because it was made using a fallacy). I am aware of that now. So the fact actually is that I did not know the meaning and that while that was so I argued accordingly. This has changed in the meantime. Mikrotherion wrote I hear you. :P Since you have heard me, then please stop making this kind of small but important mistakes. And again (like before "You don't say!") you fail to understand a simple and common English phrase. Yet you think you can call my English broken and need to lecture me on the meaning of simple words? Unfortunately you've cut the text to which I replied "I hear you." So let me get it for you: " You see the stuff I made bold? It may seem trivial (you might argue that the use of "there's" + [plural] is generally accepted these days, so let's not count it) , but all these mistakes would have been so easy to avoid easy to avoid, and, well, they do add up, as you told me. If I have trusted you and look at page 4 instead, then I would have made another different argument... The inability to correctly use an if-clause aside, you seem to have trusted me, then realized it was the wrong page and then went looking for the correct one. Well done. Mikrotherion wrote Please provide evidence that I've come to ALL the threads that you made. But I admit that I like coming to your threads. However, I do not always attack (which is a bit of a strong word, since arguing something you said hardly an attack) you or your threads. "Making arguments" - now, there's a surprise, discussion in a forum called general discussion... o tempora, o mores! LMAO I am not going back and dig up all the records and present it to you just because you said so, and if you're so interested to prove your innocence then why don't you dig back all those records and provide evidence of your innocence? Sorry, I just don't take instructions from you. Nah, its not a strong word, instead, you are just too sensitive. No, not just because I say so, but to show that the claim you made was not empty. However, I'll spare you the work and just post an example of one of your threads that I did not post in: https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1912345/page/1#p14556827 Mikrotherion wrote 1. We're only talking about what I said to adghar so far. I would like to point out that I even contributed to the thread pointing out why I used to hate the lab. 2. I agreed with you that adghar's post was irrelevant and that after posting such an irrelevant post he should not be surprised at your sarcastic remark. Sorry i would also like to point out that even though a person has made relevant replies, he could also add hidden provoking comments or arguments as well. There are people who made replies that appear to "help" but their real intention was to provoke or argue ultimately. It's just like "person A" came to "person B's" thread and started an argument with person B and when when person A gets humiliated or his lies exposed he came to another different thread of person B to make some comments again. The comments Person A made contains some relevant points in response to Person B's topic but it also contains hidden provoking comments. The ultimate aim of Person A's action was because he wants to start another argument with Person B again but in a new thread because its an "un-humiliated" thread. There were no "hidden provoking comments or arguments" in my post. I know this because I wrote it and did not hide anything in it. You attacked my post by implying what I have said was wrong and I perceived it as a direct challenge. Is it not obvious enough for you to understand? Erm... no, it is not obvious, because I did not imply what you said was wrong. You are mistaken there. Thus you have no reason to perceive it a a direct challenge. Tell you what, I think you took offense not because of what was said, but because of who said it (me). Now take a look at this phrase again from pg 9 And you made a post saying that it is "ok" to post that you like the labs which totally implies that I am wrong and I saw it as a direct attack on my arguments. What, again? I did say "You can come here and post... " because I have no power (you admitted that, you even said it was common knowledge) to forbid adghar to come and post his irrelevant stuff and directly afterwards, in the same sentence told him that he should not be surprised that people might find that irrelevant. Mikrotherion wrote Please, never consider becoming head of whatever country you live in. War might be inevitable. If you take offense so easily and then refuse to accept that you actually haven't been attacked, there's not much that can be done, really. Oh so is that what you do best? When you have misunderstood other people due to your own language incompetence, you create another rubbish comment to make it look like the fault lies with the other person? . Just think this through. You're head of a state, some other head of state says something you for some reason take offense at and then refuse to accept that you mistakenly took offense at it, that there was nothing to be upset about (other perhaps than that you normally don't get along all to well with that other political leader).... what might sooner or later happen between such two states? Mikrotherion wrote Perhaps you should lol less and think more. You're asking who I am to say that you were not attacked... well, gee, I am the alleged attacker. I am not aware of an attack - and yes, this my opinion is very important, since I should know my intentions best. I also went to the trouble of a lengthy explanation why it was not an attack, since I cannot, as you stated, read your mind. Thus it didn't even cross my mind that what I wrote could be taken as an offense. Wow, looks like I really need your permission and approval first before I can make any comments. Just Bravo !!!! Do you know how to detect sarcasm by the way? I am afraid the English dictionary does not really help you to detect sarcasm. Of course it didn't cross your mind what you wrote could be taken as an offense. Do you know why? Let me tell you why. Just take a look at this phrase on pg 7 of this thread, You on the other hand came in and said that it is "ok" to say that you like the lab in a topic which was created to discuss why you hate the lab. Your words implies that I am wrong and that's why i see it as an attack on me. >>>> i already explained Now take a look at this phrase again from pg 9 of this thread And you made a post saying that it is "ok" to post that you like the labs which totally implies that I am wrong and I saw it as a direct attack on my arguments >>>> i explained AGAIN I have to explain 2 times before you actually get the meaning of it and those 2 sentences have the same meaning but slight differences and you on the other hand is not able to grasp the idea of it. You only understood pg 9 but you failed to understand pg 7. This has only 2 possibilities. Possible reason one > You simply ignored page 7 explanation or you have selective reading Possible reason two > You do not know that the explanation in pg 7 is equivalent to pg 9's explanation Yes, I know what you wrote. So you took offense at my post and I explained why there was none to be taken, which you persistently refuse to accept. You were offended because you thought I was implying you were wrong. I was not. End of story. Mikrotherion wrote I would think it is, yet you took offense at me not forbidding adghar to come here and post irrelevant stuff. (See above) Seriously do you know what you are saying? Previously, you stated that you finally get the reason why I took offense at your comments now you're saying another different thing. Do you truly understand or are you just pretending to understand? I understood that you took it as a direct attack at your arguments, not why, since I was agreeing with you on adghar's post being irrelevant. Mikrotherion wrote And we're back to square 1. :D You can't know my real intentions. You complained that I did not explain my claims, yet whenever I do explain, you call it lies, excuses or sugar-coating. That's because it really is. And I have already explained why i call it lies. As a recap, see below. I noticed that you made arguments for every point except for this. Why? Because it was caught red handed..... ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Mikrotherion wrote What? You want me to admit it again? Fine, I tried to make a joke with your post and turns out the joke's on me. Now, is it coincidence? Not at all. I quoted one of your posts and tried (and failed) to make a joke of it. OHHHHHHHHH. Now you're singing a different tune, and this time, a honest tune FINALLY. The phrase, "and turns out the joke's on me" makes a whole world of difference between the initial reply that you gave. There is a whole world of difference between "quoted one of your posts and tried (and failed) to make a joke of it " and "I tried to make a joke with your post and turns out the joke's on me" .. However, you should add the phrase " due to my ignorance" behind the underlined sentences above. That would be a more truthful representation. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// No, I won't add anything. I admitted my mistake, more than once already. Have you admitted that your taking offense at my post was a mistake, because there was nothing to take offense at and that you obviously misunderstood? No. You're just repeating ad nauseam that you thought I was attacking you because I wrote that it was OK to post here if you liked the lab. And I did not even write exactly that. I wrote that "you can of course come here and state that you have no reasons (as you did), but you should not be surprised that people might find that irrelevant." And I already explained that I could barely write "You cannot come here...", because I have no power here to tell people where they can and where they cannot post. You took that as me saying: "Yes, it's totally OK that you post your irrelevant stuff here. Please more of that, let's trash YoursTruly86's thread." So what I said, in other words, would be: "Your post is indeed irrelevant, just look at the topic title, which is "Post your reason why you hate doing labs". It is fine if you like the lab, good for you, and I can't stop you from coming here and posting this irrelevant shit, but keep in mind that it is irrelevant and people might call you out on it." If you misunderstand that as an invitation to come here and post "I love the lab.", that is regrettable, but language can lead to misunderstandings. If after my explanation that there was no implied, hidden or whatever criticism of your arguments in my post, you still refuse to accept it and go on about wrong page numbers, stuff from other threads and so on, you just can't be helped. Mikrotherion wrote And you think it is completely impossible that I have learned from my mistake? I can tell you I hate making mistakes and when I do make one, I try to make sure I won't do it again. And again, the fact that I made a mistake is no basis for arguing that I am wrong here. This is a logical fallacy called Whataboutism. And it is even less a carte blanche for you, meaning that because in a different discussion I made a mistake, you cannot possibly be wrong in any discussions following that one. Sorry you never learn. Wrong. What I noticed is that you like to talk big but in fact you know nothing about it. Not just from this case whereby you pretended to know something when in fact you know nothing... You say that a lot, can you prove it? Let me just tell you this cold hard truth. A person isn't qualified to educate people on things which he or she does not know of, especially, from a person who has a past history of talking shit out his mouth. Not saying it is you specifically, but can you get the idea? Well, that is true. However, have you not repeatedly criticized my English, yet your own use of language is far from perfect. Have you not failed to understand "You don't say!" and "I hear you!", very common phrases? Have you not shown a certain lack of grasp of English when you used wrong tenses and wrong spelling? Mikrotherion wrote It would be nice to have some people read the post in question and judge whether it was an attack. Hopefully, its not your friends for sure. Well, of course, it would have to be an impartial arbiter. However, I feel that you would call anyone agreeing with me one of my friends. Mikrotherion wrote Why, it's me, your friend Mikrotherion. Well you mentioned and gave me an advice to have a thicker skin. Now I guess you seriously have a very think skin. No, but I do have a ThinkPad. I also have a rather thick skin, yes. I don't take offense as easily as some other people. Mikrotherion wrote I was not implying. I was explicitly (that's the exact opposite) saying I was the ultimate authority on that matter (i.e. whether I was trying to make a joke); it was me who wrote it and I know my intention. Just OMG.... It's just too tiring explaining to you when you have trouble understanding English.. As this is the last few points of your argument, i shall not bother giving you a detailed explanation like i have given above. Please go back and refer to what I have said and think MORE. Mikrotherion wrote The reason does not have to be hate. I really don't hate you. If we met on the street (knowing who we are), I wouldn't punch you, try to kill you or anything that could be associated with hate. I find our debates fascinating. How can i ever trust a person who says one thing but means another thing instead as seen and proven in this thread. Sorry I don't trust hypocrites generally. Oh btw, are you threatening me? LMAO No, I am not threatening you. I said I wouldn't (would not) punch, kill (or try to) or do anything that could be associated with hate. Mikrotherion wrote Just look up "You don't say!" in a phrase book. For your convenience: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you_don%27t_say Still does not change the fact that you tried to rephrase the words to your advantage. For more explanation just take a look at the cut and paste argument below. ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Mikrotherion wrote>>>> this is from page 9 of your confession to your mistake What? You want me to admit it again? Fine, I tried to make a joke with your post and turns out the joke's on me. Mikrotherion wrote >>>>this is from page 6 of your confession to your mistake Now, is it coincidence? Not at all. I quoted one of your posts and tried (and failed) to make a joke of it. Notice the way you phrase it? Both has entirely different meanings. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// You're reading way too much into the difference of wording here. But it seems to give you some sort of satisfaction to quote this as often as you can. Both sentences have not entirely different meanings. Bird lover of Wraeclast Las estrellas te iluminan - Hoy te sirven de guía Te sientes tan fuerte que piensas - que nadie te puede tocar Last edited by Mikrotherion on Jun 18, 2017, 6:01:02 PM
|
|
|
I hate the lab because I have serious lack of hand eye co ordination and usually instead of hitting a flask to run through the trap killing me I just stand there instead.
Also I am only allowed to play PoE for 5 minutes at a time so taking 10 minutes to complete the lab is impossible, every time I try and do it and survive those traps my wife come along and switch off the computer halfway though my run and tell me to get back in the cupboard :( "You want it to be one way, but it's the other way"
|
|
|
As promised, here's a reply to your last post in the thread that I was asked to let rot:
" " Bird lover of Wraeclast
Las estrellas te iluminan - Hoy te sirven de guía Te sientes tan fuerte que piensas - que nadie te puede tocar |
|
