Not an error report, just question about OOB12 *DELETED* *DELETED*

[DRG]

"delete the thread" ?

What's that ? An apology ?

Don

[thatguy96]

An apology? You could say that I guess. Its more of a "I guess this doesn't need to be here" kinda comment. I don't know what I'd be apologizing for really, since I never said I had a problem with anything, I was just curious as to why things had been done, and apparently they weren't even done as I had remembered them in the first place. You could've just said "its not the case" and left it at that, I mean, I didn't force you to post a large and fairly hostile response, wasting your time. You didn't have to post anything at all. I shouldn't have to apologize for making an honest mistake, and not attempting to continue challanging the reality.

I do apologize for having a brain fart at 2 AM and deciding to post without checking, but really I feel like I'm being accused of trolling, when I would've gladly admitted to being wrong had it simply been pointed out. I have done that now. I mean, I am wrong, there's no question there.

[DRG]

Well it's too bad you deleted your original post that is in itself long and involved and very, very definite in it's assertion that ..." In game, however, the M60 is a feature at squad level in every instance after its introduction." It was written in the tone of someone who KNEW this to be 100% true. Anyone casually reading it would have thought so. Do you really think I could have answered with a simple "its not the case" and left it at that and expect you or anyone else reading it to accept that answer without giving a detailed response ??

Not likely.

And just how does this constitute a "fairly hostile response" when all I did was lay out all the facts to prove my point ??

Don

[thatguy96]

I understand that was how you took it from your response. All I can say is that inference about tone from text written on discussion boards, chat programs, and the rest on the internet can lead to interpretations quite different from author intention. My writing style has gotten me into trouble before, I apologize for leading you to believe my intentions were more hostile. My post was long simply because I wanted to make sure people had the history that I myself was working with in my mind when it came to mind after searching through infantry in OOB12 and it immediately appeared this way (I had been looking through mech and airmobile units while doing other edits, which led me to make this post, which are a small subset, and for which my assertion is in part true).

Furthermore, a response to me of "its really not the case if you look yourself," would have led me to look for myself and admit my fault, because it simply isn't the case. Why worry about giving the whole detailed response when any person checking to challange you would run into the same facts? This isn't academic discourse, this is a discussion forum, I don't think anyone would fault you for not providing references.

However, you can see the same in how I interpreted you response, which I felt in the cases of the 3rd and forth paragraph and the last one, that seemed to be overly hostile to the fact that you were having to do all the research that I could have done myself.

[RecruitMonty]

It happens from time to time.