Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7300948" data-attributes="member: 6919838">first graph - no the goal was not to clear the cover... you keep explicitly changing the stated goal to fabricate a point about a response to an example with a stated goal. certainly an interesting approach and one that might work in some cases.Second graph - but still one you felt necessary to point out. One might see that as an attempt to undermine an opposition view by pointing out what you perceived as a rules knowledge lack on their part. But, clearly that is not the case since you are one who goes after those kinds of things.third graph - sorry if you feel it is a dodge if i point out that you shifted away from (but still referenced) a case of stated impossible goals to position against it using a case of specifically NOT THAT applied to the response. thats not dodging as much as exposing, IMO.fourth graph - i do not know how to explain it more than i already have that might make it less confusing for you. I dont know of anyone who in the case of searching around a graveyard (or thru ghost ships) to find stuff would get hung up on or even use the word "seeing" and have a problem with "finding" being used but hey... its good that the "other side" doesn't get hung up on what specific word is used to describe things when it comes to actions and resolution, right?Last graph... pretty sure that nowhere in that description did i say anything about missing things that are not hidden, and  i am pretty sure you knew that already when you made that statement.</blockquote>

Verification