Finally, you admit your motivation for doing all this. This is a purely emotional decision on your part that doesn’t involve looking at any factual support to believe in anything that might be going on. It is exactly as I was saying all along.
That’s ridiculous. You’re misunderstanding the point of proving things. Both of us are trying to prove a point. I agree that I am unable to prove my point from the source material, but my argument is that you were unable to prove your point, as well. Since the source material can be interpreted either way, then neither of us have a proof. Once neither of us have a proof, then we can both choose the interpretation that we feel most comfortable with. That argument is not nonsense, nor is it not based on the facts presented.
The only way it can be interpreted “either way” is if you give people the “benefit of the doubt” without any basis like you’re doing, while ignoring the rest.
I’m not ignoring anything. The facts as presented in the article don’t conclusively and unreservedly point to Sinistral’s view, therefore my point of view is valid.
Anyway… honestly, I’m sick about arguing about this, if you want to know the truth. If you guys insist that I’m being naive or gasp-the-horror actually thinking that people aren’t necessarily as bad as you’d all like to think, and that I’m completely unjustified in these views, that’s your prerogative. I’ve got better things to do than go back and forth for another week.
What Walhalla said.