(12-12-2014, 06:35 PM)Twaddle Wrote: I am curious, would you support an exploit that allowed someone else to just shut down your ship's shields? That is, after all, the converse of the position you are supporting; to wit, that your opponent has more control over your equipment than you do.
I'm trying to have a substantive discussion. You begin sophistry. Seems like the matter really touches you. U MAD BRO?
Wow, what a masterful piece of trolling. You add nothing to the discussion, accuse me of something, and resort to false endearments. I must be winning the argument.
To answer your question, being mad at someone who lacks the courage of his convictions is like being mad at water for being wet; it is something to be aware of, but not something to waste emotional investment on.
You consistently reverse your position when you are losing, you take things out of context so often I wonder if YOU, much less anyone else, know what you are saying from day to day and you seem to pick fights for the joy of starting "things". Having watched you do whatever it takes to get what you want makes me pity you, nothing more.
As to my "sophistry", I stand by the original question. After all, the entire opposing argument is that an obvious exploit is acceptable because it allows someone to force "interaction", not RP. Accepting that position, I am simply trying to establish when and where the hammer will fall for taking advantage of things to my benefit. If one exploit is legal and another is not, I want to know how and why the determination was made that way.
