[#QUDSWSOIF]
said
:
Dethal
said
:
Good offence is the best defence!
Same could be said for a good defence is the best offence though
but here, yea, defence
also nice name change of thread, much more friendly in my eyes
I don't think "Saradomin is Benevolent" is an unfriendly thread name.
I only chose "The Defence of Saradomin" because it's more applicable, I still argue he is a benevolent God, but I'm countering a lot of negative claims made by other users in the process so it's more of a defence as well.
It's like a fortress now, where massive amounts of lore can be stored and commented upon to express his good nature and intentions.
I like the new thread name
The purpose of adventure is to shine light into dark places,
Poke monsters with a sharp stick, Then steal anything that isn't nailed down!
To the Manor Born QFC 185-186-367-65788716
Nerevarine x
said
:
I only chose "The Defence of Saradomin" because it's more applicable, I still argue he is a benevolent God, but I'm countering a lot of negative claims made by other users in the process so it's more of a defence as well.
I don't know if you've realized it but most people don't care about your interpretations.
I'm pretty cool
Dethal
said
:
Nerevarine x
said
:
I only chose "The Defence of Saradomin" because it's more applicable, I still argue he is a benevolent God, but I'm countering a lot of negative claims made by other users in the process so it's more of a defence as well.
I don't know if you've realized it but most people don't care about your interpretations.
From my experiences, a lot of people's explanations (including yours) lack lore and support to make them credible, so I don't care about those interpretations myself.
However, I am willing to discuss and debate with people who back up their perspectives with lore.
I purposefully create my threads with lots of evidence so that my view is robust.
As I've mentioned several times, the quoted lore speaks for itself, my explanations are elaboration and discussion on the issues presented but the lore on its own upholds Saradomin's benevolent nature.
06-Dec-2013 11:39:12
- Last edited on
06-Dec-2013 11:43:52
by
Nerevarine x
I only chose "The Defence of Saradomin" because it's more applicable, I still argue he is a benevolent God, but I'm countering a lot of negative claims made by other users in the process so it's more of a defence as well.
I know
, it just sounds less like, this is a fact, which people do not agree with, here its now that, its your views (and many saradominists
) about saradomin, which in my mind is friendlier
06-Dec-2013 11:40:16
- Last edited on
06-Dec-2013 11:42:04
by
[#QUDSWSOIF]
Nerevarine x
said
:
Dethal
said
:
Nerevarine x
said
:
I only chose "The Defence of Saradomin" because it's more applicable, I still argue he is a benevolent God, but I'm countering a lot of negative claims made by other users in the process so it's more of a defence as well.
I don't know if you've realized it but most people don't care about your interpretations.
From my observation, a lot of people's explanations (including yours) lack lore and support to make them credible, so I don't care about those interpretations myself.
However, I am willing to discuss and debate with people who back up their perspectives with lore.
I purposefully create my threads with lots of evidence so that my view is robust.
As I've mentioned several times, the quoted lore speaks for itself, my explanations are elaboration and discussion on the issues presented but the lore on its own upholds Saradomin's benevolent nature.
Back up implies it can be proven but an opinion cannot be. Providing lore as to why you have that opinion is fine but to use the term back up implies something entirely different and something that is factual.
The lore allows people to make opinions about Saradomin's nature benevolent, malevolent or otherwise. You seem unable to accept that and unable to accept that people just don't like your god.
Your view is no more robust than somebody that hates Saradomin due to the colour of robes he wears. Your reasonings for liking him are just more substantial than his for hating but it does not make a view more robust.