megatronus wrote:ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:megatronus wrote:to withdraw entirely from a debate without being able to engage a clearly stated argument, and then to couch that withdrawal in projection, is to reveal your own smallness
Wow. That... That looks like the childish "Ha ha you're ignoring me that means I win" defense to me. It's a complete denial of the fact that people can get legitimately frustrated and fed up with feeling like they're arguing in circles, and decide that it's not worth any more time or effort. And if you think that's an invalid approach to take, then you're
really not worth engaging with.
I did cool down, and go back and try again to engage your points.
Look, you called me a fool, accused me of "moon logic", and tried to contradict things that Hasbro has told me in person. Then you imply that you've blocked me when I didn't come around to your view of things, and now you're trying to cast me as childish for calling all this out. (Can you see why I might have viewed this behavior as projection?)
Yes, I can. But I legit felt at the time that you were only responding to half of what I was saying both times you'd responded to me. I
was projecting a bit, and I was my flabbergastedness with someone completely different over a different argument into my feelings and decisions here, which wasn't fair to you. I'm sorry for that, and for calling you a fool and childish
megatronus wrote:I'm neither trolling nor passing off opinion as fact - I delineated my frustration with the multiple Primes (my opinion) from the way Hasbro currently plans and executes design & production on main line Transformers toys (established fact/truth).
It's one thing to say "I respectfully disagree" or "I need a break from this conversation." It's another to look at our interplay and say "another added to the list" with the intention of ignoring me entirely (and then yet another thing to proceed to very much not ignore me, lol). It's not about "winning," it's about having the conversation.
I was planning to ignore you because I felt like engaging with you further was pointless at the time, but I cooled own and had second thoughts about it.
I know that they've said that it's two years from conception to shelf and that they plan things out in advance now. But I also know or at least surmise from observation and deduction that that two-year timeframe is more likely a conservative estimate than an absolute. And I know from observation and other things they've said that the planning isn't always planned all the way through and is subject to changes.
Now, I certainly think they had multiple Primes in the pipe, but I'm not convinced the corrected chest tooling was made in advance. Or that any of his new tooling beyond the gun was made in advance for that matter, but especially the chest. I really do think that was a post-development fix.
megatronus wrote:If you love that first Studio Series Prime, great. Awesome. I'm glad it does something for you. I just want a definitive Prime, and this subsequent release makes the first one feel unworthy.
If you think I love that first Studio Series Prime you weren't properly parsing what I was saying. I said that the second one with the fixed chest is the only reason the first one has any worth at all (and only as an accessory pack for the second). If not for the second one's chest fix then neither would be worth a penny in my book and I'd just get the old Battle Blades Optimus from 2010 in their stead.
I perceived that
you had liked the first version and were being upset that the one with the better chest had come out, and I perceived that you saw it as purposeful planned obsolescence. Was I mistaken?
