I'm not even gonna react to the rest, cus your really not making any sense.
Well, in that case i shall concider this sentence to be: "I see your opinion and I have no valid arguments against it ... but I just have to say that I still disagree with you, because otherwise it would mean that I realized that I was wrong ... so I will simply try to undermine it by some general and a meaningless statement."
I presume that is fair.
That's funny for someone that has tendency to react to half my arguments and say that I make assumptions, while ignoring elaborations on statements.
I assure you it's not because I don't have arguments. The reason is because you lack understanding of the most basic concepts of game design and immersion. Either that, or you are a professional troll. I'm not gonna be able to convince you, you'll always just react with nonsense. Melkisedeck destroyed your whole "just don't use it" argument, but you're still going as if you make good points...
You're still acting as if people just want others to not have fun, while I already explained to you that the presence of this stuff actually affects people's enjoyment. You're making no effort at all to understand this. The stuff you're arguing for is exactly the same, you want it to be perfect for you. Many people want an RPG to be an immersive experience, where the world is believable and their choices matter. You just want a map where everything is allowed and you make your own rules. I suggest you go play Garry's mod, there's pretty much infinite things to try out there.
TBH, it's clearly an attempt to make others give up exposing their arguments.
This is not only noticeable by the mockery tone used, but also because there is a lot of intelectual dihonesty in the arguments, like:
a) Isolating phrases to distort what was said;
b) Making false correlations;
c) Purposefully misinterpreting/misreading arguments made by others to lie about what was said;
d) Changing the subject of the discussion;
e) Using another issue to justify the manaintence of the issue under discussion;
f) Responding to a distorted version of what was said - hoping that people without patience/time to read all of it wil actually believe in the false information given.
It's just arguing to be annoying, and pretend that nobody will notice this kind of behavior.
And another thing already mentioned here:
"Winning" arguments on the forum with contrived logic and disingenuous talking points since October 2020, all thanks to the uncanny ability of murdering people's mouse wheels and using pointless multiquotes as a bizarre ritual to drain everyone's mental strength.
