Quote:
Originally Posted by oXus
that i've said it was a subtext - twice - means i haven't suggested it was stated. so re-iterate that again, please.
when i emphasize your lack of knowledge, it's of previous (almost ubiquitous) arguments which coloured both the initial comment and reply -- taken literally, i wouldn't disagree the exchange seems unusual. given history, it actually makes more sense than your pedantry allowed it to.
so you're contextually uneducated. telling someone to educate himself.
now, you're stubborn. but probably see where i'm coming from by now if not by my second address of you. i'm quite sure you were only trying to antagonize, though. maybe i was doing the same? i wasn't.
you're welcome.
|
I wasn't saying anything other than it wasn't stated in the post lol
The subtext is irrelevant...he jumped to a conclusion that wasn't stated, this is basic communication. How do you know that subtext was there? Because it is an argument that exists? That's a completely invalid statement, if Masaii has argued this point before with Rugged then I can concede that Rugged knew something about Masaii's post that wasn't apparent...I now know that there exists a view like Rugged accused Masaii of having, but that does not mean it is necessarily Masaii's view. What don't you understand about that?
Some people say if you don't like a certain rapper you don't appreciate true Hip Hop, but that is not the same as saying that people who do appreciate Hip Hop will probably enjoy that rapper because that does not imply you are wrong if you disagree.
Masaii did not imply that anyone who does not like this guy does not appreciate the technical game, he said people who do appreciate the technical game would enjoy him...why do you struggle to see the difference?
Your retort that lots of people have that argument is irrelevant unless you know that Masaii shares that opinion, and you can not know that based solely on his post in this thread.