So yes, until I get all the answers I need I'm going to keep beating my head against a brick wall and I'm going to keep "bullying" people into accounting for my arguments. This is a matter of process though, not agenda. My one and only agenda came in the form of MMS Eldar and that is far more about fixing a terrible game mechanic than anything else. The Eldar from that document still do not come close to the Eldar of my agenda.
I think that a certain amount of compromise is possible. However, I also hold up that I can generally disagree with others without calling the things they like 'crap' or otherwise disparaging them.
I can't. I've got Crap Tourettes. If I see crap I just automatically scream it out. As for compromise, the only possibility is on assumptions, not argument.
This is exactly what I am talking about Sig. This is saying "yes, I can come across as a bully, but I'm not a bully, I just do bully-ish thing." You aren't going to get more debate form me because I am just indulging you. I feel as if I have given good reason to what I have proposed, even if you haven't accepted it. I have acknowledged that your arguments have validity, but this isn't about one being objectively true or objectively false. This is a preference issue and game mechanic issue about who thinks which of two different methods work better. We don't need to go further on this, Sig, and I don't want to keep building up tension between us, so I am going to let it go.