KefkatheMad wrote:
Because the forums are so overwhelmed with posts god forbid I reiterate something right? I actually spent money on this game because I wanted to support the devs. But the fact that there is less than one post per day and there is a mod complaining about the post shows that the priorities of the developers are clearly screwed up.
The idea of a mod coming on the forum to harass a poster about double speak when there is less than 1 post per day is the equivalent of a man telling another man to shut up when he found an extra bottle of water in the dessert.
...
You haven't even re-commented on your old thread. How can you already create a new thread?
Now to prove why you don't know what your talking about. Your basic argument is circular/ unsupported as you never actually prove HOW the devs are screwed up in their priorities. You simply state that them asking you not to recomment on the forums is screwed up. That is highly controversial, so we have to look at your statement itself to prove it not to be. You try to state that they are harassing you, but they are not. Let us consider the definition of harassment provided by merriam webster dictionary. Harass is defined as "to annoy or bother (someone) in a
constant or repeated way", and korupt only said ONE thing. So, that contentions is dropped entirely. Also, your evidence is easily dropped as I am sure that more than one person goes on the forums each day, as I see multiple posts made each day. Even so, how does this matter? If there is less than one post on the forum per day, that does not justify you to reiterate the same thing again when players are already debating on another thread. Now this brings me to an important point. By making two threads of this argument, you are actually hurting your own case as threads are meant for people to debate, by splitting it into 2 threads people won't be able to debate as much. To finish up, you create a straw man fallacy when you present your "desert" analogy. This does not apply here, because there is another circular argument with the original argument about electrical builds being underpowered OR even how this is a bad thing. You haven't proved ANY of these things, so your water analogy doesn't work: you are saying that water is an important thing in a desert, but you haven't proved that your statements are correct or even important.
