(Sep. 15, 2012 3:22 PM)Crab Commando Wrote: [ -> ] (Sep. 15, 2012 12:20 PM)th!nk Wrote: [ -> ] (Sep. 14, 2012 10:50 PM)Crab Commando Wrote: [ -> ]This is something I made up back when Zero-G was really, really new. Other than the merging with the Samurai Crystal Wheel, (unintentionally) called it?
... yes because repeating gimmicks is totally unseen and we haven't already had a second use of large disks, and the main gimmick of your track, merging with samurai for some baffling reason, was probably completely off, unless it for some reason does that with Gladiator, not to mention your track name being completely unprecedented and it being shown that at a 145 height in zero g stadia, BD145 (and likely any disk at that height) suffers massive scraping issues so your track idea is basically incompatible with the system they're designing all new parts for.
Yeah, nailed it.
WTH? I was simply trying to point out something, which was merely some dumb speculation. No reason to act all sarcastic about it.
I know about E230, as well as SA165. They are ridiculously sized and I wasn't super-surprised to see "Zero-G's BD145" now, but guess what? This was before Phoenic's Track was even revealed and all we had released in Zero-G were W145, SW145, and IIRC, 145.
One other thing, I (among others) hardly knew the mechanics of "what works, what doesn't" in Zero-G stadia back then for heights.
I completely regret making that post earlier now because you seriously had to get all over it. Did you really have to stomp down my post to hell like that?
What I posted was stupid, there. Happy with yourself? You couldn't break it to me in a less rude way?
Oh wow.
Quote:I know about E230, as well as SA165. They are ridiculously sized and I wasn't super-surprised to see "Zero-G's BD145" now, but guess what? This was before Phoenic's Track was even revealed and all we had released in Zero-G were W145, SW145, and IIRC, 145.
One other thing, I (among others) hardly knew the mechanics of "what works, what doesn't" in Zero-G stadia back then for heights.
I was not criticising the original post, but your choice of bringing it up.
Perhaps I should explain why I responded at all. Every time a new beyblade is announced, someone points to some dream they had, some post they wrote, something they talked about with their friends yesterday, the shape of a cloud they saw, some entirely different and impossible part they described, anything, and say "Oooh look I thought of this look at me I'm a unique and pretty little flower". Most new beyblades introduce a few new parts, and as a result this often happens multiple times per release, and sometimes people say it about past releases too.
As you can imagine, I've seen it a lot, and seeing something that you know is dumb so many times starts to get tiring. This is generally the case any time I criticise a particular behaviour in public. I do it publicly not out of malice, but to discourage others.
As for the sarcasm, rather than just yell at someone like some jumped-up disciplinarian, I like to point it out in a more humorous manner, not to belittle the person, but to cushion the blow. If my post succeeds in making them realise why what they're doing is tiresome and silly, then rather than feeling "schooled" or whatever, they can much more easily laugh at themselves about it - which I consider an extremely important life skill. I'm generally used to people who can do that, too.
Sarcasm itself is something I tend to do naturally, it's something deeply ingrained in my personality and my sense of humour, and it's not something I'm going to change
It's also worth noting that if I don't use sarcasm, I usually come across much harsher, and that definitely would have occurred here.
I hope that answers your questions, however as your post didn't relate to the discussion itself, it would have been better written as a private message. I'm responding publicly as I imagine others may want to read the explanation too, however I suggest we not derail this thread any further.