Official High Elf Discussion Megathread

[Darththeo]

How are you not seeing that you're contradicting yourself? You replied to me criticizing pro Helfers, saying that I'm wrong about them trying to make the argument about objective reasoning. Yet, in what I have bolded in this reply, these are responses to objective reasoning.

Stop focusing on the quips that Ion gave. They're meaningless. The devs don't want to do it. That's all that matters. Focusing in the fluff he gave won't suddenly make him go "wow I'm wrong I better give them High Elves!"

I don't think you know what the word contradiction means. As for the rest, I agree ... my response to you was because nothing you said actually countered the issue Pro-Helfers are arguing for.

- - - Updated - - -

Those are tentacles and not every void elf has them, but it does not change the fact that in many void elf hair styles are tentacles.

Those are not tentacles. They don't look like void tentacles ... they look like a dreadlock ... which is hair. Just declaring something a tentacle doesn't make it a tentacle.

[Obelisk Kai]

I don't see those as void tentacles. They do not look like the void tentacles that appear elsewhere in game. They look like glowing hair.

The Void Elf hair styles which include tentacles also include hair and you can clearly tell the difference between Void Elf hair and Void Elf tentacles...I am not going to argue this with you. If you can't see that they are tentacles I recommend loading up wow and spending a good deal of time examining the hairstyles to understand that you are wrong on this point.

That's splitting hairs ... again. The object they were using was infused with Void energies. They were exposing themselves to the energy.

It's the difference between getting sprayed by a water gun and falling into the sea. It is the intensity of the exposure that is key here and which you are ignoring to create your false equivalence.

They do not act identical ... one group sides mainly with the Alliance and the other mainly with the Horde with each having some members neutral. They literally do not act identical.

In other words the sole difference between the two is the political opinion as I said. Guess what? That is nowhere near enough to justify breaking the faction wall for.

Also, just because you swallow what the devs says as truth doesn't mean everyone should.

This isn't philosophy or current events where everyone has a valid opinion. On a point of lore, the developers are automatically right. It is inarguable.

Just because you are incapable of thinking for yourself doesn't make my argument bad.

Your argument is bad because it relies on false equivalences that don't make sense and ignoring word of god.

Your entire counter is borderline insult to those who disagree and Devs say this!

Again, if the developers make a comment on a topic, that is pretty much it. Your problem is that they didn't agree with your position.

You ignore or push off ANYTHING that suggests you are wrong.

The irony of this statement considering not five days ago we got confirmation that I was completely right and that you are ignoring or pushing off what Ion said.
He even confirmed that the core of my opposition, the faction wall, was the reason High Elves aren't getting added.

There isn't "considerable" difference just because the devs declare it to be.

Yes, there is. And if you took the time to look at the void themed, purple, tentacled Void Elves you'd see it too.

Again, either they are all the same or they are all different ... you don't get to pick and choose what matters.

The idea that a Void Elf is identical to a Blood Elf/High Elf because a Blood Elf and a High Elf are identical to each other isn't really worthy of argument.

Void Elves are purple.

No Blood/High Elf is purple.

That is just the start of proving that the statement you are making is demonstrably wrong.

[Darththeo]

The Void Elf hair styles which include tentacles also include hair and you can clearly tell the difference between Void Elf hair and Void Elf tentacles...I am not going to argue this with you. If you can't see that they are tentacles I recommend loading up wow and spending a good deal of time examining the hairstyles to understand that you are wrong on this point.





It's the difference between getting sprayed by a water gun and falling into the sea. It is the intensity of the exposure that is key here and which you are ignoring to create your false equivalence.




In other words the sole difference between the two is the political opinion as I said. Guess what? That is nowhere near enough to justify breaking the faction wall for.



This isn't philosophy or current events where everyone has a valid opinion. On a point of lore, the developers are automatically right. It is inarguable.




Your argument is bad because it relies on false equivalences that don't make sense and ignoring word of god.



Again, if the developers make a comment on a topic, that is pretty much it. Your problem is that they didn't agree with your position.



The irony of this statement considering not five days we got confirmation that I was completely right and that you are ignoring or pushing off what Ion said.
He even confirmed that the core of my opposition, the faction wall, was the reason High Elves aren't getting added.





Yes, there is.



The idea that a Void Elf is identical to a Blood Elf/High Elf because a Blood Elf and a High Elf are identical to each other isn't really worthy of argument.

Void Elves are purple.

No Blood/High Elf is purple.

That is just the start of proving that the statement you are making is demonstrably wrong.

I am sorry ... are you going to put forth an argument more than nuh uh? Nothing you said proved anything and I feel I wasted my energy reading it. I don't care if you waste my time, but your entire argument is just you declaring that I am wrong without an actual argument.

[Combatbutler]

Those are not tentacles. They don't look like void tentacles ... they look like a dreadlock ... which is hair. Just declaring something a tentacle doesn't make it a tentacle.

Those aren't dreadlocks, they are fleshy appendices known as tentacles. Just take a real close look at them ingame.

[Goldielocks]

I don't think you know what the word contradiction means.

Right.

This will never happen. The HE zealots can't accept the devs did what they did mostly for subjective reasons, because that means they can't prove the devs wrong. Without that, the chance of the decision overturning (especially in the short term) greatly diminishes.

I haven't seen anyone who fits that description.

My problem is solely with the reasons the Devs have given their fans. They are weak and they very much seem not to be true in game.

Of course.

As for the rest, I agree ... my response to you was because nothing you said actually countered the issue Pro-Helfers are arguing for.

Actually it did. The point was that they can't argue against a purely subjective view. That's all encompassing lmao

[Darththeo]

Right.



Of course.

Actually it did. The point was that they can't argue against a purely subjective view. That's all encompassing lmao

Thanks for proving you don't know what contradiction means. You didn't really need to do that.

No Helfer disagrees that the Devs used purely subjective reasons for their decisions ... their problems is those reasons aren't objective. In other words, Pro Helfers ACCEPT that the reason is subjective but would prefer that they were given an OBJECTIVE reason. Did you forget you stated the words "can't accept"?

- - - Updated - - -

Those aren't dreadlocks, they are fleshy appendices known as tentacles. Just take a real close look at them ingame.

I have. They aren't tentacles.

[Goldielocks]

Thanks for proving you don't know what contradiction means. You didn't really need to do that.

No Helfer disagrees that the Devs used purely subjective reasons for their decisions ... their problems is those reasons aren't objective. In other words, Pro Helfers ACCEPT that the reason is subjective but would prefer that they were given an OBJECTIVE reason. Did you forget you stated the words "can't accept"?

Hello? You're saying that I'm wrong that pro helfers are trying to turn this argument objective and then you say that their problem is that those reasons aren't objective?

Are you okay?

[Combatbutler]

I have. They aren't tentacles.

Sure that is hair

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e9/9e...1c829a7e90.png

[Darththeo]

Hello? You're denying that I'm wrong that pro helfers are trying to turn this argument objective and then you say that their problem is that those reasons aren't objective?

Are you okay?

That's not what you said before. You stated they can't accept the subjective reasons. That isn't what you are saying now. If you said that Pro-Helfers can't accept they won't get an objective reason ... no problem. What you stated was they can't accept a subjective reason. Those aren't synonyms.

- - - Updated - - -

Sure that is hair

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e9/9e...1c829a7e90.png

Just declaring something a tentacle doesn't make it a tentacle.

You do know there are things in our world made of hair that don't look exactly like hair right?

[Goldielocks]

That's not what you said before. You stated they can't accept the subjective reasons. That isn't what you are saying now. If you said that Pro-Helfers can't accept they won't get an objective reason ... no problem. What you stated was they can't accept a subjective reason. Those aren't synonyms.

Thats....exactly the same. The point of not accepting subjective reasoning is because the objective reasoning they have a chance of winning. If anything, you misinterpreted what I said, because that was exactly the point. Reread my comment.

[Combatbutler]

Just declaring something a tentacle doesn't make it a tentacle.

You do know there are things in our world made of hair that don't look exactly like hair right?

If it helps you sleep at night.

[Darththeo]

Thats....exactly the same. The point of not accepting subjective reasoning is because the objective reasoning they have a chance of winning. If anything, you misinterpreted what I said, because that was exactly the point.

Again, it isn't they don't accept the subjective reasoning is they prefer objective reason. These aren't synonyms more matter how hard you declare them to be.

You were not clear in your stance. If you stated they can't accept they ONLY get subjective reasoning ... that's closer. But you stated they can't accept subjective. These don't mean the same thing.

[Grythletubs]

I'm a pro-Helfer but if Ion is against it we can't really do much. I don't even play alliance but I really liked the idea of being able to interact with high elves as players instead of them being empty npcs.

Also it doesn't help that Blizzard are always parading Vereesa and Alleria around so much. Who knows, maybe he'll change his stance on high elves.

[Darththeo]

If it helps you sleep at night.

I am sorry logic doesn't seem to make sense to you.

[Goldielocks]

Again, it isn't they don't accept the subjective reasoning is they prefer objective reason. These aren't synonyms more matter how hard you declare them to be.

Really is quite obvious as to why they'd prefer objective reasoning lmao

There's no need to be coy here. An infant would be able to see why.

[Darththeo]

Really is quite obvious as to why they'd prefer objective reasoning lmao

There's no need to be coy here. An infant would be able to see why.

I am not being coy. You just can't accept that what you type isn't what you meant and now you are choosing to push the blame on me rather than accept you weren't clear.

[Goldielocks]

I am not being coy. You just can't accept that what you type isn't what you meant and now you are choosing to push the blame on me rather than accept you weren't clear.

I'm not sure how this wasn't fucking obvious as fuck:

This will never happen. The HE zealots can't accept the devs did what they did mostly for subjective reasons, because that means they can't prove the devs wrong. Without that, the chance of the decision overturning (especially in the short term) greatly diminishes.

The entire point of this comment was to laugh at how pro helfers were taking Ion's side comments so seriously. Why were they taking them so seriously? Because they're objectively questionable. Therefore, they have a chance of saying "Ion's POV is flawed, so that means if we show him that he's wrong, then he must come to his senses and give us High Elves!" There's a fucking reason why these people want objective reasoning behind High Elves being a thing. It fucking increases the chances of them happening. Dramatically.

As I said before, this is a laughable sentiment. You misunderstood my quote. Good job.

[Darththeo]

I'm not sure how this wasn't fucking obvious as fuck:
The entire point of this comment was to laugh at how pro helfers were taking Ion's side comments so seriously. Why were they taking them so seriously? Because they're objectively questionable. Therefore, they have a chance of saying "Ion's POV is flawed, so that means if we show him that he's wrong, then he must come to his senses and give us High Elves!" There's a fucking reason why these people want objective reasoning behind High Elves being a thing. It fucking increases the chances of them happening. Dramatically.

As I said before, this is a laughable sentiment. You misunderstood my quote. Good job.

Yeah, I don't see how you think that's what you said.

You seem to not understand what you said and think it says something you didn't.

[Goldielocks]

Yeah, I don't see how you think that's what you said.

You seem to not understand what you said and think it says something you didn't.

Well, you are the one who perceives a Void elf head tentacle as something that it clearly isn't, so I guess this is likely a wasted effort of me continuing to reply. You don't seem to see things correctly.

[Darththeo]

Well, you are the one who perceives a Void elf head tentacle as something that it clearly isn't, so I guess this is likely a wasted effort of me continuing to reply.

That's because unlike you I actually think about what something is rather than label it as the first thing that pops into my mind.

The problem is you think you said something you really didn't say. Hell, one word added makes your statement what you are claiming ... it's not my fault you failed seventh grade English.