Post by Latios XT on Apr 14, 2006 2:34:29 GMT -5
P and R by the way means in this case politics and religion, just ran out of space on the subject line. There's a reason why we don't talk about either: it's a life decision, how we want to live our life.
The last "controversial" topic I posted in another forum I go to (Serebiiforums.com, unless you're interested in Pokemon, probably not a good idea to spend some time there), relating to this topic. Now I have posted articles like this in the manner of how it's written (attacks a group for doing something), I've attacked wishful thinkers about the new Pokemon games as they come out.
Here's what bugs me. Those articles I wrote, people were happy, they agreed, they wanted the forums to stop being cluttered with "What if" or "this'll be cool" topics. I post that up, one person in particular goes off on a tangent, claiming this person has something against Nintendo and how it's a "right" for anyone to praise anything they want, to the point of fanboyism or not. I laid down a few more things, ending lastly with "If it's a right to praise a company, it's a right to complain".
Okay if there's anything I learned in arguing, it's to not imply anything, only argue what as explicitly said. This person implied on both his article and my replies. Although the person who wrote the article may not like Nintendo, but you can't prove that as it wasn't explicitly said.
The last reply I allowed (I closed the topic), he said "When was it ever alright for someone to complain just because someone else likes something?".
So it's not a right for anyone to complain about people who like to do something.
I closed the topic with this remark: "Apparently people are fine when it's something they want. But as soon as someone attacks something they like, they get all pissy and "you can't do that!""
This is why I hate fanboyism. And yes I implied the person I was arguing with is a fanboy (Well if he has the specifications of the Nintendo Gamecube in his sig...)
The last "controversial" topic I posted in another forum I go to (Serebiiforums.com, unless you're interested in Pokemon, probably not a good idea to spend some time there), relating to this topic. Now I have posted articles like this in the manner of how it's written (attacks a group for doing something), I've attacked wishful thinkers about the new Pokemon games as they come out.
Here's what bugs me. Those articles I wrote, people were happy, they agreed, they wanted the forums to stop being cluttered with "What if" or "this'll be cool" topics. I post that up, one person in particular goes off on a tangent, claiming this person has something against Nintendo and how it's a "right" for anyone to praise anything they want, to the point of fanboyism or not. I laid down a few more things, ending lastly with "If it's a right to praise a company, it's a right to complain".
Okay if there's anything I learned in arguing, it's to not imply anything, only argue what as explicitly said. This person implied on both his article and my replies. Although the person who wrote the article may not like Nintendo, but you can't prove that as it wasn't explicitly said.
The last reply I allowed (I closed the topic), he said "When was it ever alright for someone to complain just because someone else likes something?".
So it's not a right for anyone to complain about people who like to do something.
I closed the topic with this remark: "Apparently people are fine when it's something they want. But as soon as someone attacks something they like, they get all pissy and "you can't do that!""
This is why I hate fanboyism. And yes I implied the person I was arguing with is a fanboy (Well if he has the specifications of the Nintendo Gamecube in his sig...)