Ragna Crimson - Vol. 5 Ch. 22 - The Bloodline Meets
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
- Messages
- 1,823
@firefox1234
Not quite what I meant. Judging something based off of it's demographic is different than judging it neutrally. I can admit Dora isn't an awful show, it's perfectly fine. I'd kill myself if I had to watch it everyday but I'm capable of admitting that it's "a decent show". As I read it, you're conflating taste and demographic into one and saying that it can't be judged fairly by people outside those. I don't agree with judging a show (just on or largely based off of) who it's trying to entertain / appeal to or what it's trying to be because by that basis, everything is 10/10. Though I will say the goal of the series is very relevant. Appealing to or entertaining a demographic is not a goal mind you, at least not one worthy being judged on. A goal can't be entirely subjective as those are, it has to be somewhat objective or measurable, such as telling a good story, educating, commentary on an issue, etc. Judging something as neutrally as possible, devoid of taste, IMO, achieves the goal of rating a series more than enough. The question is never "do I like this", but "how well done is this" & "what is the goal and how well achieved is that goal", and often enough, somewhat in-spite of what I said, the easiest way to answer these questions is by reference and comparison to other series.
I'm not saying this is bad because I'm not in the demographic or I don't like it, frankly, as far as mediocre manga go, I do kind of like it and I believe I have comments in the past chapters expressing that. However, I'm saying it's bad because it's mindless, edgy, generic, low quality, has very few lessons and doesn't achieve it's goal with any particular note. Dora is a perfectly acceptable show, specifically for children, because it entertains and teaches them in many ways about different things. The goal isn't to tell a story, but educate, something Dora does very well. I can't speak on DBZ because I can't remember a fucking thing about it, but Naruto, which will hopefully function as a substitute, is a perfectly fine show because there are a lot of good lessons for teens, a decent and somewhat consistent story, and a detailed and original world. This manga is mediocre because the story isn't particularly special, nor is the world building, nor are the characters and it's goal of entertainment & telling a good story can be found in 100 different manga done much better.
Simply put, I don't agree because I think something can be judged objectively (or in a generally fair manner) outside it's demographic.
Not quite what I meant. Judging something based off of it's demographic is different than judging it neutrally. I can admit Dora isn't an awful show, it's perfectly fine. I'd kill myself if I had to watch it everyday but I'm capable of admitting that it's "a decent show". As I read it, you're conflating taste and demographic into one and saying that it can't be judged fairly by people outside those. I don't agree with judging a show (just on or largely based off of) who it's trying to entertain / appeal to or what it's trying to be because by that basis, everything is 10/10. Though I will say the goal of the series is very relevant. Appealing to or entertaining a demographic is not a goal mind you, at least not one worthy being judged on. A goal can't be entirely subjective as those are, it has to be somewhat objective or measurable, such as telling a good story, educating, commentary on an issue, etc. Judging something as neutrally as possible, devoid of taste, IMO, achieves the goal of rating a series more than enough. The question is never "do I like this", but "how well done is this" & "what is the goal and how well achieved is that goal", and often enough, somewhat in-spite of what I said, the easiest way to answer these questions is by reference and comparison to other series.
I'm not saying this is bad because I'm not in the demographic or I don't like it, frankly, as far as mediocre manga go, I do kind of like it and I believe I have comments in the past chapters expressing that. However, I'm saying it's bad because it's mindless, edgy, generic, low quality, has very few lessons and doesn't achieve it's goal with any particular note. Dora is a perfectly acceptable show, specifically for children, because it entertains and teaches them in many ways about different things. The goal isn't to tell a story, but educate, something Dora does very well. I can't speak on DBZ because I can't remember a fucking thing about it, but Naruto, which will hopefully function as a substitute, is a perfectly fine show because there are a lot of good lessons for teens, a decent and somewhat consistent story, and a detailed and original world. This manga is mediocre because the story isn't particularly special, nor is the world building, nor are the characters and it's goal of entertainment & telling a good story can be found in 100 different manga done much better.
Simply put, I don't agree because I think something can be judged objectively (or in a generally fair manner) outside it's demographic.
Fed-Kun's army
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2018
- Messages
- 442
@Yautja I love the fact you can't even make a reasonable argument directed to me, instead generalize it. When the fuck have I ever, in any comment section of this series, said shit on this series?
"with no other response than "you don't know what edgy means" instead of pointing out how I'm wrong or this isn't edgy" did I not give reasons? Your reason to call it edgy is because the evil and psychotic villains show moments of insanity like in pg12 of this chapter. Wow, great critique. If it has gore, revenge, rage, or any of the above, then it's edgy, eh? So Beserk, Terraformars, Gantz, and so many more high rated series are just dumbed down to "edgy", I guess.
The series has literally tons of instances of gruesome murder and genocide. How is it not dark? MC literally saw his one and only friend die once, lives through suffering in battle through a whole life time, possibly immortality, and now has to it again. How is that not tragedy?
If you know another series, where dragons invade the world, MC transcends godhood and reincarnates to his past self, and re-runs his entire battle hardened life to ensure a happier ending, please go ahead and name drop them.
"with no other response than "you don't know what edgy means" instead of pointing out how I'm wrong or this isn't edgy" did I not give reasons? Your reason to call it edgy is because the evil and psychotic villains show moments of insanity like in pg12 of this chapter. Wow, great critique. If it has gore, revenge, rage, or any of the above, then it's edgy, eh? So Beserk, Terraformars, Gantz, and so many more high rated series are just dumbed down to "edgy", I guess.
The series has literally tons of instances of gruesome murder and genocide. How is it not dark? MC literally saw his one and only friend die once, lives through suffering in battle through a whole life time, possibly immortality, and now has to it again. How is that not tragedy?
If you know another series, where dragons invade the world, MC transcends godhood and reincarnates to his past self, and re-runs his entire battle hardened life to ensure a happier ending, please go ahead and name drop them.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2019
- Messages
- 36
rip comment section
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2018
- Messages
- 86
.
never know roasting people online is a thing in this manga. well some people will overglorify it like they do with sao and some will shit on them but at least this manga alone pretty cool in my opinion. the art consistent the plot is there and we know that the mc and all deus ex machina like in some of isekai manga.
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
- Messages
- 1,823
@OsoJr
And why exactly would I make an argument against someone who hasn't made an argument? You've said "story good, story is this, you dun know what edgy means".
Hello? Never said you did. Go reread the comment.
Give reasons for why it isn't edgy? You didn't. You do know what edgy means, right? Or do you need a dictionary for that too? I don't read those series so I couldn't say, but considering you're just listing a lot of stuff that I know has shocking material and relegate the term edgy to "gore, revenge or rape", it seems you do. Edgy is specifically when something overdone trying to be dark or cool, like the pg12.
I didn't say it isn't dark or tragic, I said it's not dark or tragic imagery. Or have you forgotten that? Saying something is dark or tragic isn't the same as saying something has dark or tragic imagery.
And why exactly do I need to do that to prove that this manga is edgy?
If you're referring to the generic comment, generic doesn't mean that there's a literal copy of this manga already existing, that's closer to plagiarism, and not even plagiarism always means 1 to 1 copy. While I'm defining words for you, generic just means not special, not distinctive, lots of things like it, and there are a thousand reincarnates to past self, or OP mcs on a crusade. Like Goblin Slayer, Nidome No Yuusha, Murabito Desu ga Nani ka?, Dungeon Seeker, etc.
@KittenLasers
First off, not isn't. Second off, never said that is the case. Third off, already did in another comment.
Yea, because this has any significant or well done plot or character progression. I could turn that around on you, having your entire world shattered by one guy in one encounter but then completely bouncing back after a couple of heart to hearts, even though the guy that shattered your world is stronger than you and by extension everyone covering you seems unreasonable. Setting up a fear that never existed because it was thought to be impossible, then having that fear disappear out of nowhere because friends is ridiculous. Having someone have two massive changes of heart each in the opposite direction in 5 chapters with very little justification other than "her teammates comforted her and god said so" isn't really good writing. Talk about whiplash writing. Anyways, all that said, I said this was mediocre for a reason. I said edge isn't an excuse to avoid story just to point out how edgy it is and how it didn't add anything. I didn't say it was shit. (EDIT: Looking back in my other comment, I said bad and mediocre, should have just said mediocre.) I said mediocre, and if you think what happened is fantastic writing, boy do I have a couple of scripts to sell you.
Yea, because using quick and easy descriptors in a comment section makes me some bad cliche. Talk about irony, focusing on buzzwords and using those as an excuse to dismiss a person. Excuse me for not giving a full blown review of a series in a single comment section of a single chapter. I didn't realize that I have to write a dissertation every time I have a criticism. And yes, because somewhat liking something I can admit is mediocre gives you enough proof say I hate on popular stuff because it makes me appear a certain way. Maybe, just maybe I can admit not everything has to be good for me to like or enjoy it at times. You wanna talk about people name calling and throwing out buzzwords, take a look in the mirror before making such ridiculous assumptions.
Maybe if you could get beyond your inferiority complex and going on a full blown rant and trying to psychoanalyze someone just because they called something mediocre I'd give a shit about what you have to say. But considering you're pulling all that out of your ass because I decided to criticize a series in one comment and clarify my position on a different topic in a completely different comment, instead of writing a 3 page review with citations to satisfy your ridiculous casual comment section criticism I don't think I do. What a ridiculous load of assumptions. If you wanna talk about someone pretending they're smart or superior you could not have set yourself as a better example with that comment.
And why exactly would I make an argument against someone who hasn't made an argument? You've said "story good, story is this, you dun know what edgy means".
Hello? Never said you did. Go reread the comment.
Give reasons for why it isn't edgy? You didn't. You do know what edgy means, right? Or do you need a dictionary for that too? I don't read those series so I couldn't say, but considering you're just listing a lot of stuff that I know has shocking material and relegate the term edgy to "gore, revenge or rape", it seems you do. Edgy is specifically when something overdone trying to be dark or cool, like the pg12.
I didn't say it isn't dark or tragic, I said it's not dark or tragic imagery. Or have you forgotten that? Saying something is dark or tragic isn't the same as saying something has dark or tragic imagery.
And why exactly do I need to do that to prove that this manga is edgy?
If you're referring to the generic comment, generic doesn't mean that there's a literal copy of this manga already existing, that's closer to plagiarism, and not even plagiarism always means 1 to 1 copy. While I'm defining words for you, generic just means not special, not distinctive, lots of things like it, and there are a thousand reincarnates to past self, or OP mcs on a crusade. Like Goblin Slayer, Nidome No Yuusha, Murabito Desu ga Nani ka?, Dungeon Seeker, etc.
@KittenLasers
First off, not isn't. Second off, never said that is the case. Third off, already did in another comment.
Yea, because this has any significant or well done plot or character progression. I could turn that around on you, having your entire world shattered by one guy in one encounter but then completely bouncing back after a couple of heart to hearts, even though the guy that shattered your world is stronger than you and by extension everyone covering you seems unreasonable. Setting up a fear that never existed because it was thought to be impossible, then having that fear disappear out of nowhere because friends is ridiculous. Having someone have two massive changes of heart each in the opposite direction in 5 chapters with very little justification other than "her teammates comforted her and god said so" isn't really good writing. Talk about whiplash writing. Anyways, all that said, I said this was mediocre for a reason. I said edge isn't an excuse to avoid story just to point out how edgy it is and how it didn't add anything. I didn't say it was shit. (EDIT: Looking back in my other comment, I said bad and mediocre, should have just said mediocre.) I said mediocre, and if you think what happened is fantastic writing, boy do I have a couple of scripts to sell you.
Yea, because using quick and easy descriptors in a comment section makes me some bad cliche. Talk about irony, focusing on buzzwords and using those as an excuse to dismiss a person. Excuse me for not giving a full blown review of a series in a single comment section of a single chapter. I didn't realize that I have to write a dissertation every time I have a criticism. And yes, because somewhat liking something I can admit is mediocre gives you enough proof say I hate on popular stuff because it makes me appear a certain way. Maybe, just maybe I can admit not everything has to be good for me to like or enjoy it at times. You wanna talk about people name calling and throwing out buzzwords, take a look in the mirror before making such ridiculous assumptions.
Maybe if you could get beyond your inferiority complex and going on a full blown rant and trying to psychoanalyze someone just because they called something mediocre I'd give a shit about what you have to say. But considering you're pulling all that out of your ass because I decided to criticize a series in one comment and clarify my position on a different topic in a completely different comment, instead of writing a 3 page review with citations to satisfy your ridiculous casual comment section criticism I don't think I do. What a ridiculous load of assumptions. If you wanna talk about someone pretending they're smart or superior you could not have set yourself as a better example with that comment.
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2018
- Messages
- 45
Always baffles me that people can vomit out so many words and still manage to say nothing of value.
Fed-Kun's army
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2018
- Messages
- 501
Nice chapter giving some development for the enemy, I wonder what old dragon dude true form is like and what it can do, also why turning into it makes him die afterwards... Can't wait for when the battle starts, just what will crimson plan to destroy them? Can't wait o3o
On an alternative note... So much debating because of the term "edgy"... :v
On an alternative note... So much debating because of the term "edgy"... :v
Fed-Kun's army
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2018
- Messages
- 442
@Yautja so if anything is emphasized, then it's over doing it? Is it not obvious that specific instance in pg12 is to literally emphasize the emotions of that character? Something the author has been doing through out the manga? What exactly is edgy to you about this manga? Specify your critique, not your example. It would be edgy if it's obviously not reasonable, because then it'd literally be trying to hard, thus edgy. In this instance, that character right there is literally a psychotic and devote worshiper of his/her master. Emphasize on his rage for his previous failure, he says protection because that's literally his specialty and duty. What exactly made you think it's edgy? Because he's painted black? Something that obviously symbolizes and emphasizes the rage that's overcome him?
Last chapter, Nebulim literally looks over to Kamui, thinking how he can be more confident and oppressive like him. Kamui, the one who literally convinces their god to channel her anger. What made you think Nebulim is just angry to be edgy? Ortho literally comments on his change of tone.
"I don't read those series so I couldn't say, but considering you're just listing a lot of stuff that I know has shocking material and relegate the term edgy to "gore, revenge or rape", it seems you do."
Ex-fucking-scuse me? Did you have a stroke? That's not what I'm saying, that's what YOU'RE implying. With how pompous you write your replies it makes you look like a troll. How the fuck are you gonna attempt and turn my own words on me, when it's clearly directed to you? Every series I named, have several common instances similar to what the author depicts in pg12. Then by your comparison, any of those high rated series would be considered edgy.
" Edgy is specifically when something overdone trying to be dark or cool, like the pg12. "
Two chapters ago, MC made a poop joke. Explain how pg12 is overdone and trying to be dark or cool again? Because it's black? Because it depicts anger?
I say it's not edgy, it's just expressive.
Last chapter, Nebulim literally looks over to Kamui, thinking how he can be more confident and oppressive like him. Kamui, the one who literally convinces their god to channel her anger. What made you think Nebulim is just angry to be edgy? Ortho literally comments on his change of tone.
"I don't read those series so I couldn't say, but considering you're just listing a lot of stuff that I know has shocking material and relegate the term edgy to "gore, revenge or rape", it seems you do."
Ex-fucking-scuse me? Did you have a stroke? That's not what I'm saying, that's what YOU'RE implying. With how pompous you write your replies it makes you look like a troll. How the fuck are you gonna attempt and turn my own words on me, when it's clearly directed to you? Every series I named, have several common instances similar to what the author depicts in pg12. Then by your comparison, any of those high rated series would be considered edgy.
" Edgy is specifically when something overdone trying to be dark or cool, like the pg12. "
Two chapters ago, MC made a poop joke. Explain how pg12 is overdone and trying to be dark or cool again? Because it's black? Because it depicts anger?
I say it's not edgy, it's just expressive.
Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2018
- Messages
- 100
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
- Messages
- 1,823
@OsoJr
You're trying too hard, pedantic isn't a good look for you. The critique has been specified with the example to show it, there's nothing more to say because you fundamentally disagree and are being a child going into baby rage because I said it about a manga you like. Misunderstanding half of what I said and dropping out a half dozen fallacies is testament to that and how little value there in genuinely trying to communicate with you. You're gatekeeping a word you don't like because it's being used against something you do like.
Excused. No, that's what you're saying. I linked to and defined edgy for you. You're the one who's intentionally trying to muddy the definition so you can defend this manga. Rape, gore and revengeHow exactly that is the same as the other two or is beyond me. I think you just snuck that one in to defend this manga even though it's not even close to the same as the other two can be edgy, sure, but are they anything like page 12? Not really. You're just using them as a scapegoat and are trying to imply that I think those things are inherently edgy for some reason or another, something I never implied. Maybe you should start specifying your critique* and explain how implied those things?
Congratulations, you have a different opinion. The next step is realize that and not fly in a cheeto and monster fueled rage everytime someone has a one differing than you.
You're trying too hard, pedantic isn't a good look for you. The critique has been specified with the example to show it, there's nothing more to say because you fundamentally disagree and are being a child going into baby rage because I said it about a manga you like. Misunderstanding half of what I said and dropping out a half dozen fallacies is testament to that and how little value there in genuinely trying to communicate with you. You're gatekeeping a word you don't like because it's being used against something you do like.
Excused. No, that's what you're saying. I linked to and defined edgy for you. You're the one who's intentionally trying to muddy the definition so you can defend this manga. Rape, gore and revengeHow exactly that is the same as the other two or is beyond me. I think you just snuck that one in to defend this manga even though it's not even close to the same as the other two can be edgy, sure, but are they anything like page 12? Not really. You're just using them as a scapegoat and are trying to imply that I think those things are inherently edgy for some reason or another, something I never implied. Maybe you should start specifying your critique* and explain how implied those things?
Congratulations, you have a different opinion. The next step is realize that and not fly in a cheeto and monster fueled rage everytime someone has a one differing than you.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2018
- Messages
- 86
.
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
- Messages
- 1,823
@KittenLasers
I didn't say that. Don't twist my words, actually, it's more than twisting. Don't blatantly lie about what I said. I said it was edgy, and mediocre, just not bad. Ironically, it's you who's not a very good reader.
Ha! So you're that kind of person. "IT'S gOoD iF yOu liKEe iT". Not how things work. There's a reason there are literature awards, writing schools and marks and criteria for all sorts of writing courses. Now I know there's no point in talking to you. I hope you're still in high school or college and have to take a writing course and get failed when you tell the teacher "I enjoyed this piece I wrote so I expect a good mark". What an insane and petulant belief.
No, it's me pointing out you're a hypocrite. Complaining about "buzzwords" and then using those alone as a justification to completely categorize me as a person and a reader is not only hypocritical, but fallacious. Your justification for making an insane amount of claims is "I saw this person making the OK hand sign so he must be a nazi". You don't get to have your cake and eat it. Me using words you don't like is not nearly enough to brand me "just another one of those people who think hating on popular stuff gives them an acquired taste." or "you only want to enjoy a sense of superiority by acting as if anyone who thinks its good has terrible taste unlike you." If you don't see the irony in complaining about someone using words you don't like and then defining everything about that person based on those words, you could not show yourself to be a greater hypocrite in any way.
Next you show even more hypocrisy by saying "I'm not expecting every single thing to be justified, anything that is abundantly clear shouldn't need it, but anything that is subject to controversy does.". Why do you get to define what's clear? Perhaps this is all clear enough to me. Rules for thee.
Thank you Sherlock, you've discovered hyperbole and sarcasm. Not like you're not doing it. Oh, but it seems you get to decide what has a place in this discussion. What a surprise. Notice how I actually had a conversation with 1/3 of people who replied to me and explained my position. I'm not bothering with you for some reason. Why do you think that is? To answer my own question, I know what you're expecting, and your first sentence where you try and pretend I said something I didn't tells me. You're looking for a fight, and to assert that you're right, just like 95% of people on the internet. The other person actually tried to have a conversation. As for why I'm not going to "give you justification", it's because:
A) You clearly don't care, since me pointing out your hypocrisy is "just insults" and "very sad attempt at turning my own words against me", why would I bother proving A when you've rejected proof of B because you just don't like it? You can insult me all you want, but the moment I point out that you're doing it and call you a hypocrite, you don't have to answer.
B) You're not going to accept it since you've already decided you get decide what's what through your comments: "I'm not expecting every single thing to be justified, anything that is abundantly clear shouldn't need it, but anything that is subject to controversy does." and "attempt at a hyperbole in an argument that has no place for such.". Those two comments which show how self centered you are tell me that you're just going to toss out whatever I say, as you've already done in your most recent reply, and you'd likely do to any "justification" I bring up.
C) You just want a fight and base things off of how you feel and your opinion. Saying "You admitted to enjoying it, and that in itself should make it good." shows me that there is zero hope for discussion because you believe in your subjective little world in being all that matters. You couldn't give a fuck whether or not I give proof, you give a fuck whether or not it convinces you or you agree with it, which isn't the same thing. You don't give a shit about what my criteria is and that quote is exactly how I know. You enjoy it, it's good. Therefore my opinions and my "justifications" are worthless because you enjoying it is all that matters.
Again, no it wasn't, it was me pointing out your hypocrisy, because you sure as hell are pretending you're smarter or superior, something you complained about. Trying to completely categorize me and my reading habits and who I am as a reader after 2-3 replies based off of "buzzwords" and failure to meet your ridiculous standards is the purpose of that paragraph. You don't just get to say "I don't like it therefore it has no substance" which, granted, is the basic summary of what you've done so far.
Please, do continue to show me how much of a hypocrite you are. Tell me about how it only matters whether or not I, or rather you, like something. Tell me more about how you get to decide what's clear or what's controversial. Tell me more about you get to decide what has place in a conversation. Tell me more about how I'm the one who wants to enjoy a sense of superiority or how II'm the one not giving enough proof. Tell me more about how you get to insult me because you've offered "justification" but I don't because what I've said is "just an insult" with no justification. What an absolute joke. I'm not discussing this series with you because there's no fucking point; you've already made up your mind, and you're raging hypocrite who bases everything on your opinion, which is ironically what you're bitching about. Projection much? God, you could be in a house mirrors and still fail to see your own flaws.
I didn't say that. Don't twist my words, actually, it's more than twisting. Don't blatantly lie about what I said. I said it was edgy, and mediocre, just not bad. Ironically, it's you who's not a very good reader.
Ha! So you're that kind of person. "IT'S gOoD iF yOu liKEe iT". Not how things work. There's a reason there are literature awards, writing schools and marks and criteria for all sorts of writing courses. Now I know there's no point in talking to you. I hope you're still in high school or college and have to take a writing course and get failed when you tell the teacher "I enjoyed this piece I wrote so I expect a good mark". What an insane and petulant belief.
No, it's me pointing out you're a hypocrite. Complaining about "buzzwords" and then using those alone as a justification to completely categorize me as a person and a reader is not only hypocritical, but fallacious. Your justification for making an insane amount of claims is "I saw this person making the OK hand sign so he must be a nazi". You don't get to have your cake and eat it. Me using words you don't like is not nearly enough to brand me "just another one of those people who think hating on popular stuff gives them an acquired taste." or "you only want to enjoy a sense of superiority by acting as if anyone who thinks its good has terrible taste unlike you." If you don't see the irony in complaining about someone using words you don't like and then defining everything about that person based on those words, you could not show yourself to be a greater hypocrite in any way.
Next you show even more hypocrisy by saying "I'm not expecting every single thing to be justified, anything that is abundantly clear shouldn't need it, but anything that is subject to controversy does.". Why do you get to define what's clear? Perhaps this is all clear enough to me. Rules for thee.
Thank you Sherlock, you've discovered hyperbole and sarcasm. Not like you're not doing it. Oh, but it seems you get to decide what has a place in this discussion. What a surprise. Notice how I actually had a conversation with 1/3 of people who replied to me and explained my position. I'm not bothering with you for some reason. Why do you think that is? To answer my own question, I know what you're expecting, and your first sentence where you try and pretend I said something I didn't tells me. You're looking for a fight, and to assert that you're right, just like 95% of people on the internet. The other person actually tried to have a conversation. As for why I'm not going to "give you justification", it's because:
A) You clearly don't care, since me pointing out your hypocrisy is "just insults" and "very sad attempt at turning my own words against me", why would I bother proving A when you've rejected proof of B because you just don't like it? You can insult me all you want, but the moment I point out that you're doing it and call you a hypocrite, you don't have to answer.
B) You're not going to accept it since you've already decided you get decide what's what through your comments: "I'm not expecting every single thing to be justified, anything that is abundantly clear shouldn't need it, but anything that is subject to controversy does." and "attempt at a hyperbole in an argument that has no place for such.". Those two comments which show how self centered you are tell me that you're just going to toss out whatever I say, as you've already done in your most recent reply, and you'd likely do to any "justification" I bring up.
C) You just want a fight and base things off of how you feel and your opinion. Saying "You admitted to enjoying it, and that in itself should make it good." shows me that there is zero hope for discussion because you believe in your subjective little world in being all that matters. You couldn't give a fuck whether or not I give proof, you give a fuck whether or not it convinces you or you agree with it, which isn't the same thing. You don't give a shit about what my criteria is and that quote is exactly how I know. You enjoy it, it's good. Therefore my opinions and my "justifications" are worthless because you enjoying it is all that matters.
Again, no it wasn't, it was me pointing out your hypocrisy, because you sure as hell are pretending you're smarter or superior, something you complained about. Trying to completely categorize me and my reading habits and who I am as a reader after 2-3 replies based off of "buzzwords" and failure to meet your ridiculous standards is the purpose of that paragraph. You don't just get to say "I don't like it therefore it has no substance" which, granted, is the basic summary of what you've done so far.
Please, do continue to show me how much of a hypocrite you are. Tell me about how it only matters whether or not I, or rather you, like something. Tell me more about how you get to decide what's clear or what's controversial. Tell me more about you get to decide what has place in a conversation. Tell me more about how I'm the one who wants to enjoy a sense of superiority or how II'm the one not giving enough proof. Tell me more about how you get to insult me because you've offered "justification" but I don't because what I've said is "just an insult" with no justification. What an absolute joke. I'm not discussing this series with you because there's no fucking point; you've already made up your mind, and you're raging hypocrite who bases everything on your opinion, which is ironically what you're bitching about. Projection much? God, you could be in a house mirrors and still fail to see your own flaws.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2018
- Messages
- 86
.
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
- Messages
- 1,823
@KittenLasers
Hello? You're the one that veered it off by making half your comments insults to me and then trying to pretend like I had no right nor ground to call you out on that. What a joke. What exactly do you expect to happen when you insult someone? You could not have proved that long comment you don't want to read any better.
1) Wants to feel like you won something: Claiming I've been shut down when in reality you're the one trying to claim victory even though you've failed to respond and are now bowing out. Check.
2) Your opinion is the only thing that matters: I already said I was wrong to call it bad, that I misspoke and meant mediocre, something you acknowledged, then you lie saying I claimed I never called it bad. Check.
3) Hypocrisy: claiming I'm the one not talking about the series when you're the one who brought up the insults and you're also not talking about the series, also ignoring why I'm not talking about it. Check.
4) Again, your opinion being the only thing that matters: Complaining about semantics when you're the one who used a few words to completely categorize me and then said things that completely contradict your past statements or are extremely misleading. Almost like context and what a word means matters. Check
What a raging hypocrite. Your comment is just about as long as mine, and if you read that "10 paragraph of varying insults comment" you probably wouldn't have written a comment that corroborates everything in it.
Hello? You're the one that veered it off by making half your comments insults to me and then trying to pretend like I had no right nor ground to call you out on that. What a joke. What exactly do you expect to happen when you insult someone? You could not have proved that long comment you don't want to read any better.
1) Wants to feel like you won something: Claiming I've been shut down when in reality you're the one trying to claim victory even though you've failed to respond and are now bowing out. Check.
2) Your opinion is the only thing that matters: I already said I was wrong to call it bad, that I misspoke and meant mediocre, something you acknowledged, then you lie saying I claimed I never called it bad. Check.
3) Hypocrisy: claiming I'm the one not talking about the series when you're the one who brought up the insults and you're also not talking about the series, also ignoring why I'm not talking about it. Check.
4) Again, your opinion being the only thing that matters: Complaining about semantics when you're the one who used a few words to completely categorize me and then said things that completely contradict your past statements or are extremely misleading. Almost like context and what a word means matters. Check
What a raging hypocrite. Your comment is just about as long as mine, and if you read that "10 paragraph of varying insults comment" you probably wouldn't have written a comment that corroborates everything in it.
Similar threads
