Its not dishonesty to point out that you did, but it is dishonestly to now imply that you didn’t. The content you post isn’t restricted to singular topics, and what you post, alongside how you respond to people, all remain in the same sort of subtext. Its pertinent here, and its pertinent when you carry that baggage to other topics, or posters, that share your admiration.
Part of my post was even establishing that connect, but well, you didn’t want to read that cuz you assume it to be a “rambling” of run-on sentences — which is just a label for the appearance, not the content, so that you can continue the ‘dishonest’ composition of acting like you ‘read’ something, but evidently didn’t.
In this regard, however, you’re more keen on ‘attacking the person’ than you are the argument; when confronted for particulars or disagreement, you skirt details, deflect the claims, and then try to turn it on the other person though personal confrontation (I won’t insult you by [explicitly] stating something) and deriding how they wrote rather than addressing the material presented.
How [you] compose [your]self is alike that of the narrative you antagonize & classify ‘blzzrd’ to represent, so the conduct is disingenuous to perpetuate, esp given you do antagonize people with choice ‘buzz words’, and not their claims. This is more so evident in how you then try to spin things with strawman/redherrings to suit the demands of your polarized perception of what makes for ‘feedback’ or ‘criticism’ on the forum. Ya know, per your implied standards.
I have to ‘defend’ their censorship?
I don’t. Cuz…That’s not my position, that’s your deflection of what wrote. The core of your composition is ‘dishonestly’ manifest, and if you were about the ‘honesty’ you so claim, you arguably wouldn’t do that as you’d have the integrity to not compose yourself with evident double-standards.
Regarding the keeping this about HoTS? I do.
The whole crux of why I address how players compose themselves is on the basis that their conduct & concerns on the forums is indicative of how they compose themselves in-game.
Some of the feedback you use for some of the replies you’ve post are based on chat & game experience. Of what you’d said in some of those cases, details are sparse, and it tends to the the tl;dr with praise for yourself, and derision for those against you.
I’d suggest the lack of certain details the ‘how you conduct yourself’ from game experience carries a similar concern with how you chose to conduct yourself here. Deflection, superiority complex, double-standards; yea, I’m pretty sure stuff like that is going to influence some of the negative perceptions of your game experience, and if people aren’t forthright about that themselves, sometimes it takes gleaning the ‘subtext’ to get that bit of ‘honesty’.
So in that regard, getting an appraisal of details and context left out from game experience and feedback offered may take round-about ways to ascertain the perspective of the concerns conveyed.