It is directly implied with every post made that what is stated in said post is the opinion of the poster with every post that is not obviously direct fact, such as stating that APBs do more damage than DUCs. This is why I do not add a lot of frivolous qualifiers such as "I think" or "it is my honest opinion that" to my Posts. Those qualifiers are implied by the very nature of this medium of communication. You are seeing implications where there are none.
It always amazes me when people that frequently post to forums fail to realize that Posts are opinions by default, not factual reports.
=0=
And now for a mostly disjoint subject. Do not take this as any sort of attempt to distract from anything. That is a direct absolute, by the way; no implications are necessary.
I'd make it a separate post but doing so would just pad my post count even more.
Apparently most of the other posters in this thread realize this (point in first section), as they also did not throw "I think" qualifiers onto their Posts. Look at BM's post for a good example. Not once does his post include any such qualifiers. It is filled with alleged "implied absolutes." I see no mention of this in your post Jack. Why is this? Why am I being singled out? Why do my Posts deserve special attack? Is it because you do not agree with me? I would hope not, but that is a very logical conclusion to be drawn from me being singled out here.
=0=
Quote:
|
You appear to forget that "good" and "bad" when it comes to things designed for entertainment are entierly subjective.
|
Only to you, my friend, only to you.
=0=
Quote:
|
You may not have been picking on him directly, but you were picking on him, especially as the second post in this thread was a specific request for good reports on MOO3.
|
Oh, the irony. No, I was not picking on him at all. Why do you automatically assume that my disagreeing with his statements is a result of picking on him? That is an unwise assumption to make.
[ June 23, 2003, 02:52: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]