|
>>
|
2eac65.jpg
Calling Bud
2eac65
>>21007
I said:
>Rose had hoped that they could replace the aborted Skaia with their own, healthy Skaia,
I also said:
>allowing them to win the game without killing off the host species as a consequence.
I admit that the way I phrased it was unclear and could be interpreted as saying the latter was the real motivation, but that wasn't my intention.
>Then I came in and attempted to clarify
Actually, you said this:
>Killing off the host species was never really a relevant part of the scenario.
Which is untrue, as the death of the host species is part of the scenario, in the sense that Rose mentioned that it could be avoided, as I proceeded to point out. It wasn't her explicit goal, but you said it wasn't relevant, not that it wasn't intentional.
>what you said wasn't what you meant.
>All the statements you list in your post here are true, but the conclusion which you implied with your previous post
You are making two contradictory claims here. The first is that I had unambiguously stated something that was untrue, but was not what I meant. The second is that I had not stated something untrue, but my phrasing was ambiguous enough to imply it. The latter claim is the truth; that is the reason I couldn't "just read" what I wrote and know how he interpreted it and how it differed from what I actually meant.
|