txa1265
SasqWatch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,951
Lol…right, and when I immediately replied "So that explanation justifies a lack of options? " that didn't tip you off to anything, right? Please… just stop.
No, it honestly didn't - because without any sort of context (you didn't quote anything) I was left assuming what you meant, which was that you were replying directly to my statement "I would rather have restrictions based on things that make sense." Because, without you saying otherwise, I don't think it was unreasonable for me to make that assumption.
Look - a few posts back I stated "I completely agree" in a two paragraph post. Yet you specifically chose the OTHER part, and I can only assume that you did it for a specific reason. Why do I say that? Because two posts lated I once again noted "we agree" and even bolded it ... yet in your quote you once again made a conscious choice to not include that part. I am honestly not sure of the rationale.
But before you made a point - I misquoted you. While I was only attempting to paraphrase my understanding of your point when I said "I wasn't sure based on what you said about 'no restrictions of any kind'", I certainly could have made the effort to make sure I got your wording correct, but I didn't. So I apologize for that misquote and for any subsequent misunderstanding.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,951