And this is what I mean. You stated I was basically saying you were a hypocritical jerk, when I said nothing of the kind. When I said I didn't state that, you came back with, "You do not have to say it, because it is what the statement implies". In other words, you weren't going to believe me no matter what I said.
Yet in the same token, when you made a direct criticism of me, you proceeded to attempt to clarify, stating what you said was not a personal attack but instead was targeting the argument. I'm supposed to accept that, even though I, not Kelly, was not mentioned in your rebuttal.
In fact, I had let it go and wasn't going to make a big deal out of it until we came to this impasse. But I am wondering something. Why is your clarification a good and thorough justification that your intent was not personal, but my denial of a personal attack that was never stated in the first place is not given the same consideration?
It's not only that, it's cracks like this:
.......and ended with a question assuming she was "obsessed"- but again, that's just you making a claim rooted in your "blame Kelly for her own murder, because Juliette can’t be blamed for anything”- narrative.
All I'm trying to do here is just have some fun debating on yet another forum that allows for all kinds of opinions.
But we can't debate back in forth if I take on robotic mode and reaffirm what the majority of the forum is saying: "Kelly is great, Kelly is great, Kelly is great and Kelly is great, OR Nick is great, Nick is great, Nick is great, and Nick is great, OR Adalind is so good, Adalind is so good, Adalind was a pawn, Adalind was a pawn. And then follow it with a tirade about Juliette being so much worse because, well, SHE KNEW what she was doing and everyone else was either under some silly wesen poison, has memory loss, was temporarily insane, incapacitated, or some other dumb excuse. And then make sure to add that she was never good enough for Nick! Renard is a dog from hell and I was wrong in saying I liked the character. Diana and Kelly are wonderful children who are sprinkling the earth with their goodwill."
But that would be a lie. Every forum member here knows that. But if I don't say something positive about them, and something rotten about Renard or Juliette, then every single post I write is nada and just a commentary on how I think Juliette should be scott free in all of this and how I want Renard to be the hero. And of course the gloves are off for personal attacks because, don't I know by now that there are only certain characters who can be criticized?
It's not just you, I have had this from day one. I don't understand it because I'm not the very first person to state that Nick is a dirty cop and a kidnapper, or question that Adalind was not a pawn but actually had to think about what she was doing, so maybe she has not changed into a Mother Theresa figure. I'm not the first person to question Kelly's motives for leaving her son for decades involved more than just a protection angle. But yet I have been told time and time again, what do I want? She did return. Nick was nearing 30 years of age, but come on, Kelly DID return. Not to see how her son was doing, of course, but she did return.
But never mind, posters think they can just state whatever they want about ME. You've seen it. You know. Even though these are imaginary characters and not to be confused with real people, a disclaimer which the series carries, IT DOESN'T MATTER. These are all great, great actors, in the best, absolutely most phenomenal series to come along, ever. They're the Gone with the Wind of television series (well, except for Bitsie and Sasha). Even though these same posters applaud themselves as accepting of all opinions because they're on a forum that chooses to do that, they simply do not.
I've even had them asking me why I watch the show because I don't love NIck. You know that as well. I mean, really? But it's not only me. I've seen others get attacked and questioned if they were sane (really?) because they say something that is based on their opinion or isn't quite right. Or it gets worse and they're asked if they are watching the same show!
It's true, I don't respond to every single item you address. But here's the deal behind that, and it's not strictly relegated to your posts.
Not every single point I make is always addressed 24/7. I don't expect it to be. I figure the poster has a right to choose. I respect them enough to let them make that decision. The second thing is this: If a poster has made it plain that my responses are ship-Juliette, my responses are fluff and I'm not serious, or directly insulting me at every turn, is there any point to responding to every single item they choose to address in their posts? It seems to me to be a fruitless work effort because all they see is that I'm a Juliette shipper, and my responses are fluff and not serious.
I have made statements to you that I am not proud of. I would love to be able to eradicate them forever but I cannot. Please understand that they were not personal attacks but made in the heat of debate. I would like to try to continue debating as it seems we are the few remaining who talk about the series these days. That is amazing since it's been gone for years now and despite our disagreements, I do have fun sparring with you.
So what's the point of this rant? I sincerely hope that some of these posters will read this, see themselves, and just take the time to THINK. If they really and truly believe this is a forum that encompasses all opinions, they will realize the characters are not real but the people on the forum are. I'm not lumping you in with that lot because most of the time I do enjoy your posts. They're intelligent and you make it fun. But you know of those of whom I speak, because you've read their posts. They will never get that there is a difference.
As for criticizing the actors, it's not against wiki policy. There's a thread out there right now criticizing Elizabeth's acting ability. I could probably find at least 50 statements criticizing the actors and the creative team behind the series. They're actors, and the creative team develop the stories. They are under scrutiny. If they do asinine things, fans are going to talk about it. And these people have done some asinine things because they are actors and the creative factor behind the show.