Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SableWyvern" data-source="post: 9771234" data-attributes="member: 1008">Throughout this conversation, I've been saying that it sounds like you think intent only counts as intent if it's narrowly focused on a single thing.Your responses have felt, to me, as if you were saying that you are simply using intent in it's normal, common form. You even went so far as to suggest that I should start using the word &quot;purpose&quot;, because I was the one using &quot;intent&quot; unclearly.It is only very recently that you have said something to the effect of, &quot;Well, actually, I probably am using a special and very limited definition of the word intent, just like you've been saying I am.&quot;I still think your definition is a poor one that is arbitrarily narrow, but if you'd confirmed from the start that this was your definition, I would not have bothered arguing the point. As I've already mentioned, I agree that Intent* is a key part of modern design philosophy.*as defined by [USER=7026617]@Thomas Shey[/USER] </blockquote>

[QUOTE="SableWyvern, post: 9771234, member: 1008"] Throughout this conversation, I've been saying that it sounds like you think intent only counts as intent if it's narrowly focused on a single thing. Your responses have felt, to me, as if you were saying that you are simply using intent in it's normal, common form. You even went so far as to suggest that I should start using the word "purpose", because I was the one using "intent" unclearly. It is only very recently that you have said something to the effect of, "Well, actually, I probably am using a special and very limited definition of the word intent, just like you've been saying I am." I still think your definition is a poor one that is arbitrarily narrow, but if you'd confirmed from the start that this was your definition, I would not have bothered arguing the point. As I've already mentioned, I agree that Intent* is a key part of modern design philosophy. [SIZE=1]*as defined by [USER=7026617]@Thomas Shey[/USER] [/SIZE] [/QUOTE]

Verification