[cyxthryth]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The post history is clear. You are now including cyxthryth to try and strengthen your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum argument because you have nothing else. I find it highly amusing.

I am not sure what point you think you are making or what fact you think you are refuting by stating "You are now including cyxthryth to try and strengthen your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum argument because you have nothing else", but I will remind you of the irrefutable fact - which you cannot refute - that you yourself attempted to use that very https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum "argument" when a mere single (1) person seemed to agree with you hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] I will remind you with your own quotes, which are viewable by all:

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

OP agrees I am not moving the goalposts, since his post was general. There is nothing that says you can't have a pocket cleric.

to which I already replied with the following:

Originally Posted by cyxthryth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Your post would seem to betray that you are aware that you have moved goalposts, because you are now attempting (disingenuously) to validate said goalpost-moving by stating that it is objectively true that the OP's post "is general" and that this somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts" by changing the basis of the discussion (from being about 4 priests/casters, to being about 4 priests/casters plus X amount of pocket Clerics, or other pocket classes). It is not objectively true that you are "not moving the goalposts" just because you and OP both agree that the OP's post "was general" and that that somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts". That is simply you - laughably - claiming you (and OP) are correct due to argumentum ad populum hehe. This really isn't hard.

Please clarify what you mean by stating OP's post "was general"?

You did not reply to my post (as usual). Hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Only someone who is trying to deceive themselves wouldn't notice cyxthryth has been ignored for the entire thread by everybody until very recently.

As has already been explained to you, it is you who my posts have been directed toward, and yes, as I have (repeatedly) stated, you are indeed ignoring my posts. The post history is clear. In all of that very clear post history, you have provided zero evidence to support your claims that I am a troll, that I am "silly", that my posts are nonsense, etc. This really isn't hard hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]