Probably him drifting away from her in middle school. The acid only just made things worse physically.dude at start: at some point she just changed, almost like she's a different person
dude now: oh yeah she got acid thrown on her face
well I wonder what caused the change there, boss?
Nonsense.
The injury was introduced in just this chapter. And some of those comments, including the one to which I responded, expressed surprise at a flashback that effected a dramatic tonal shift.
Not all attempts at comedy are comedy.
Nonargument. I accept your concession.
You conveniently ignored my points which were: COMMENTS ARE USUALLY FOCUSED ON WHAT HAPPENS ON A CHAPTER PER CHAPTER BASIS SO IT IS HARD TO JUDGE HOW IMPACTFUL IT IT IS ON IT'S OWN and; THE SCAR ISN'T THE REASON WHY PEOPLE CARE ABOUT THE MAIN FEMALE LEAD, IT IS HER ATTITTUDE!
This statement right here is proof that you are disingenious. I point out comedic aspects of this ROM-COM (LOOK AT THE TAGS) and all you can reply with is, "nuh uh".
Oh look at you, we've got a bleeding heart over here. Just because YOU don't find the comedic aspects of this manga funny, doesn't make it a comedy. Also, just because something is funny, doesn't mean you can't SYMPATHISE with the characters. (The word you are looking for is sympathy. Empathy is more about feeling their feelings. Unless you are saying you've been in a similar situation as the characters).
Calling that a concession is infra-sophistry.
Those points were an attempt to change the subject; I simply returned to the actual issue.
No, it's a simple fact that an attempt at X is not automatically X.
Don't pseudo-quote me. My response isn't disingenuous; it's a refusal to do the work to overcome your lack of empathy. To the extent that you found the earlier chapters comedic, you are psychopathic or sociopathic. I cannot do much about that. 🤷
QED.
Not at all; my first comment on this issue was brief, not a lecture; my subsequent comments have engaged you minimally, and been shorter than yours.
Just because you can't argue against my point, doesn't make it a logical fallacy.
That's a dodge if I ever seen one.
You haven't proven that it isn't a comedy while I presented both chapter examples and used the tag system to prove that it is.
It isn't disingenious eh, then why resort to calling me nonempathetic? Why use ad hominen to discredit my character rather than my point
This only came about because you started with the grandstanding and ad hominen attacks. See:
Before this, I did not make one character judgement of you because I wanted a civil discussion. I thought I could understand where you're coming from, but clearly you weren't looking for civil discussion. Why else would you attack my character?
Just because you write less words doesn't mean you don't want to lecture others. A lecture is one-way communication. Someone listens, someone speaks. I wanted an actual converstation, two way communication. The fact you claimed to engage me minimally shows that you did not want a two way discussion. You wanted to preach your truth and make others listen.
What makes it a fallacy is that it is a non-sequitir; what makes it infra-sophistic is that it is in willful attempt to mislead.
No, the dodge is in your trying to steer away from the point that the comments express surprise at the retcon, in illustratiion of the point that it's a retcon.
Exactl because I see no point in trying to overcome your disorder.
Your examples proved attempt.
The tag system simply demonstrates that someone believed that it was comedy.
Because your lack of empathy is why you didn't recognize the motivation for the retcon, because that lack of recognition in turn played a role in your recognizing the retcon as such (the other problem being that you really didn't know the scope of “retcon”), and because your lack of empathy is why I don't worry about changing your mind.
The point wasn't to discredit your character; the point was to answer you. If a color-blind person insists that no difference can be found between red and green, part of the response is to note his impairment.
No, it came-about because you magically think think that if no one pointed-out the simple truth about those earlier chapters and your reaction to them, then you'd be just fine.
Oh, I don't know what judgment you made, but you surely made one; what you didn't do was to express that judgment. But you decided to play a game of brinksmanship about your character in finding amusement in the suffering of a character, and IDGaF about offending you.
Your mistaken hypothesis lacks evidence.
That's not all that a lecture is. And I have very little interest in communicating with you at all, exactly for the reason that you pushed me to give and then so infuriated you.
No, I wanted to answer and did answer the query by another commentator about why the scar was suddenly introduced out-of-the-blue.
It is clear that we won't agree on anything. You are too prideful to admit fault and are just replying for the sake of ego. There is no point in continuing this.
No, I'd be too prideful to cling to error.
No, I'm just replying for the benefit of other folk who may come across this thread, and still later be confronted by someone like you.
Well they'll be more updates, just not here>Reading Manga happily.
>DMCA hits
>The update list basically evaporates.
>I'm facing withdrawals due to lack of updates.
> Finally an updates arrives
> Group announces they're leaving the site and no more updates..
That’s a CYOA clause. Nothing has changed. They took down OPM when it was DMCAd like they had to for survival, just like they did this time, only this time it was a massive DMCA spanning multiple series at once.
So you’re making up bullshit, and there was no actual retcon. Thanks for finally telling us your real answer.
No, there was an actual retcon, but some people don't even know what “retcon” means. (I quoted a proper dictionary.) In particular, a retcon doesn't typically introduce a contradiction (as one fool claimed), though it often attempts to resolve a contradiction.
