In debate most people are smart enough to understand that you can say one PART of what a person said is wrong without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. My issue is with that one statement, which is easily shown as wrong. In order to say I am wrong you must defend the statement "It doesn't pay to waste socket bonuses to gem pure crit since exp/hit are the highest value stats (up until cap), with proper stat weights though "
If that statement is correct, defend it. If it's not, admit you are wrong (which you are) and move one.
Don't point to other parts which I don't have an issue with and say "HUR DUR BUT THESE ARE TRUE."
That is stupid.
Logic isn't hard people. It just requires you to not be stupid, and to not jump to stupid conclusions about what you think other people are saying.
From my first few original posts I blatantly and quite clearly said "These are your words. "It doesn't pay to waste socket bonuses to gem pure crit since exp/hit are the highest value stats"
This is not always true."
My statement is correct. It is not always true. The rest of his post I don't have an issue with. If I did, I would have shown how it were wrong. It isn't. But the blanket statement made is patently false. I'm not sure how people can't see this.