Quote:
|
I noticed how you ignored my car analogy when it became inconvenient.
|
I already answered your car analogy, what the hell is your problem?
Quote:
|
And now you're just going over and over again about a tiny small context of the use of the word 'dead.' Well, if you just want sound like a broken record, go ahead.
|
Well, it's only one problem. What else is there to say? It's not my fault that I can give the same responses to your arguments; it's the same type of 'solution' dressed up in different ways.
By the way you can stop being a total dick any time now. I'm being pretty civil with you, can't you meet me halfway?
Quote:
But here's a bone for you:
"My pa is dead, my ma is dead. Even Betsy is dead!"
There's no logical reason to differentiate the statements. There's no logical reason NOT to either. Especially when you know the other person is trying to hide a murder mystery trick.
|
Right, but it deliberately misleads the reader to think something that isn't true ("Betsy is a person and she is deceased"), and it hampers people's reasoning to understand what you're trying to convey, so you have NO REASON not to pick a better word choice unless you're being dishonest.
Quote:
|
Maybe because there was a third personality that also needed to die? If you're willing to accept that after two personalities die that then there can be a corpse.. then why not three? Or four?
|
There's the whole 18 persons reds that people were hung up on. Since Shannon and Kanon could die, they seem to be considered 'persons' even if they're only 'personalities'. If there was a 3rd personality, it would be a 19th person.
Such was the reasoning back then. Again, Umineko does nothing to curb against this, and given his reactions to the Japanese fanbase, Ryukishi seems to be aware it was going on. Either way, he's using the red to deliberately mislead people from the truth he intended. Because he wants to have his M Night Shyamalan twist.
Quote:
|
No, it's not a blatant lie in red, no matter what you say, no matter how pendantic you are or how many times you repeat it. You ignored my car analogy didn't you?
|
No, I found FAULT with it. Your car analogy was not sufficient enough to defuse my point of dissatisfaction because it wasn't equivalent to the Shannon/Kanon death situation.
Quote:
"I died last night while fighting a Greater Dragon in Skyrim."
"You liar! You're not dead!"
"..."
|
IN SKYRIM.
That right there fucks over your entire analogy. There's no equivalent point of information that gives a separate quantifier to Shannon and Kanon that sets them apart from every other character on the island. Now, if the red was
I died last night in a fight and you didn't give any more information, your analogy would be more fitting, and it would be a lie by omission because it was a deliberate misholding of information to make your listener accept a false idea.