Hi - Im really worried about TFP and 7d2d

[SylenThunder]

Wow. You've been a moderator since 1996? I'm also an older person. That doesn't seem right. Your style of moderation is not my cup of tea. I've watched you ban people for nothing over at Steam. Literally nothing.

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

I've watched people at Steam get warning and bans for pointing out mistreatment to other users.

 

That's the lowest of the low.

The issue here is that you often do not see the posts, or the moderation history, of the users that get banned. So any opinions you have on why they were banned is automatically flawed.

 

This topic is severely skewed from it's original subject of conversation.

[Kubikus]

They pile up everywhere.

 

Well, kids might. But not toxic people. You find individuals everywhere, but toxic people don't flood every forum on the planet.

 

It's just that they show inappropriate behavior when it comes to negative feedback. And these delays are reasons for negative feedback. And it's not "kids" that cause this - they could easily access this forum as well - it's what I said above.

 

Exactly.

 

 

Ehnt! You don't have all of the raw data. If nothing else, this is a serious strike against your objectivity. I will remind the forum of that every time you repeat this lie.

 

Here is a lie: Joel doesn't even lift. It is a lie, because I know he does lift. When it comes to my study, of course there are jokes involved, but essentially I actually believe my "methodology" and my findings to be correct. I certainly could be stupid and whatnot, but I'm not a liar.

 

I also have no reason to. I have no ill will against the company or the game or any of the individuals involved. On the contrary, I absolutely love the game. But I'm not a mindless fanboy that will defend each and everything about and surrounding the game to the teeth. That's because I'm an even bigger fan of "the truth" in general, but also because I believe that it's much healthier for the game to have a couple of people around, who don't say "wow great" to everything.

 

 

 

You - don't like me. That's ok. But it can be a problem in a discussion, when it's not about the subject, but the person. It's personal for you. You generally oppose everything I say. Not because it's untrue, but because I said it. Your "ehnt!" is pretty... symptomatic. I say something, and your natural reaction is "ehnt!". Kubikus: "Water is wet!" You: "Ehnt!" That's why it's no fun to argue with you, and you certainly don't enjoy it either. And that's why I don't go through your - hurr durr - walls of text and pick apart every paragraph.

[veslarius]

Wow. You've been a moderator since 1996? I'm also an older person. That doesn't seem right. Your style of moderation is not my cup of tea. I've watched you ban people for nothing over at Steam. Literally nothing.

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

I've watched people at Steam get warning and bans for pointing out mistreatment to other users.

 

That's the lowest of the low.

 

I'd say that toxicity and anger are useless and counter productive in any reasonable discussion. That being said, anyone who consistently types toxic or angry messages in such a discussion despite warnings should at least receive a temporary ban.

 

Once something has been decided to be ban-able, why would the offensive material be left on the forum for people to read? It wouldn't of-course. It would be removed as offensive material and unless you saw it before it was removed, you wouldn't actually get to see the offense for which the person was banned and of-course it would seem unjust without an offense.

 

If someone did see the offense and the ban seemed unjust, isn't there a better way to handle it than to complain on the forum? Perhaps you could submit a complaint about the conduct of the moderator in question? I've never had a problem with a moderator so I've never needed to find out, but it seems like complaining about a moderator's behavior on the forum itself would do little more than fuel and emotional, toxic and off topic direction for the discussion. I'd say if people were warned and or banned for complaining about a moderator's behavior, that would be why.

 

As far as that being "the lowest of the low"; Even if it was a moderator who didn't like to read negative things about him or herself, I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't be the pinnacle of human depravity. Calling it the lowest of the low is comparable to saying that a man should be executed for jay walking. Jay walking is at least illegal, giving warnings and bans on a game forum most certainly is not. If the moderator did ban someone for purely selfish reasons it could be called cheap, underhanded, or dirty maybe but its far from being the worst thing a person could do.

[Jedo]

When it comes to my study, of course there are jokes involved, but essentially I actually believe my "methodology" and my findings to be correct. I certainly could be stupid and whatnot, but I'm not a liar.

 

The "lie" is that you definitively proved your point based on the evidence and that your methodology is without flaw. The mere fact that you say "the raw data speaks for itself" proves you wrong. All data requires interpretation and does not say anything of its own. That is science.

 

I don't have a particular problem with you as a whole, but with your tendency to hide behind "facts" that are far from definitive. If you look at my posts on this site, you will see that that usually is my argument with people: They believe something and elevate it to the level of "fact" when it simply isn't. (For example, I generally like KingSlayerGM, but he recently crossed this line in the Dev Diary.) The problem comes later when those "facts" are uncontested and somebody else swallows them uncritically.

 

Honestly, I don't really give a ♥♥♥♥ about TFP or about whether people like this game. I have the game, I can play it whenever I want, and TFP is going to continue developing the game until they are finished with it regardless of what anybody on this forum says. There are things that I don't like about the game and the development, but so what? Personally, I choose not to air out those things because I don't see a purpose behind it. What I do care about is this public forum being filled with honest conversations where people aren't manipulating uninformed people with their nonsense.

[Reg]

This is my first post on this forum, and I created an account here specifically so I could make it.

 

TFP: Keep doing what you're doing. Alpha 16 is incredibly fun as-is, and I wouldn't have faulted you at all for calling it completed, marketing it as a release build, and moving on to your next passion project.

 

I bought the game only a couple of builds ago because a friend introduced me to it, so I don't have any experience with previous update releases on which to base my comments. That said, I have been waiting patiently this long without complaint, and I will continue to wait patiently without complaint, because as far as I am concerned, the hundreds of hours I've already spent enjoying this gem of a game more than justify the amount I paid for it.

 

I am sure that I'm not the only one who feels this way, so let me articulate it clearly --

 

Thank you. Your efforts are appreciated.

[Burakin]

So you're saying the previous years saw quick releases? Lol.. Could you clarify?

 

LOL, I had the exact same instinct reply when I read that.

 

I truly appreciate the fact that good work takes a goodly amount of time. It often takes more time then anticipated even if you try to compensate for that. (I get a lot of that at work too. My answer is simple: you want it fast go elsewhere, you want it proper, come to me. They still come back after all these years. Nevertheless you try and be accommodating and sometimes that works out, sometimes it don't)

 

Saying that you rushed things in the past....feels a little off from this side of the table. TFP was never fast in any releases.

Not always focussing on the framework where that would have been a good idea...that I believe. It's often much more satisfying short term to work on 'shiny' instead of groundwork. In the end you always pay . Apparently that is now (though one wonders what is was previous times then...)

 

Admitting the release is 'overscoped' is actually a good thing, to me it's reassuring. It just means that next time you might have to be cleared about the goals and not move them overly much - thats better then maintaining it was all intended to go this way (or just going the way it is, no intentions present other then it has to be good at some point).

 

The console promise...is a dangerous thing. That has seen some spectacular blow-ups in the past. Still it speaks of decency to commit ti it evenif it technically/legally isn't your problem - but Telltale's. So good on you. Just make sure PC goes first

 

Whether all this is making 'us all' happy... If that was the goal you've (obviously!) already failed (but you always would have). It is perhaps smart to have a session about what makes 'us happy' before committing to the new alpha? With a beta/gold closing in it becomes more important to have that rightly figured out (or choose to go for your own vision instead and be brave about it) in order to prevent (more) massive lashback. All the hatefull text and video out there...is a bit much and over the top...but at the core of it is some truth to be found.

 

Anyway keep going, don't crunch. Lack of time (or lateness) might be real, but being in a rush is an emotional state that is rarely conducive to both speed and quality.

 

and finally...

 

are we there yet?

[Kubikus]

The "lie" is that you definitively proved your point based on the evidence and that your methodology is without flaw.

But I honestly believe that, so it is not a lie.

 

The mere fact that you say "the raw data speaks for itself" proves you wrong.

It does not, because the raw data does really speak for itself. 22% of the threads are locked. In other forums, it's a whole order of magnitude less. That speaks for itself. It does not need interpretation.

 

All data requires interpretation and does not say anything of its own. That is science.

 

I don't have a particular problem with you as a whole, but with your tendency to hide behind "facts" that are far from definitive. If you look at my posts on this site, you will see that that usually is my argument with people: They believe something and elevate it to the level of "fact" when it simply isn't. (For example, I generally like KingSlayerGM, but he recently crossed this line in the Dev Diary.) The problem comes later when those "facts" are uncontested and somebody else swallows them uncritically.

 

Honestly, I don't really give a ♥♥♥♥ about TFP or about whether people like this game. I have the game, I can play it whenever I want, and TFP is going to continue developing the game until they are finished with it regardless of what anybody on this forum says. There are things that I don't like about the game and the development, but so what? Personally, I choose not to air out those things because I don't see a purpose behind it. What I do care about is this public forum being filled with honest conversations where people aren't manipulating uninformed people with their nonsense.

I assume that you don't like me personally due to your personal remarks, that go on here. You imply I am dishonest, I try to manipulate people, I hide behind facts that are not facts.

 

You portray me as some kind of deceitful villain, and you seem determined to prove each and everything I say wrong, and you never acknowledge anything to be true. For example do you not accept that I am honest when I say I honestly believe my methodology is flawless. No, you insist it's a lie.

 

Typical signs that it's personal and not about the matter. For example did you complain about me only using the first 15 pages of those other forums. I checked all the pages, and you did say nothing more about it. Went on to the next complaint, that I only checked 3 other forums. I could check 10 more, and you would simply move on to the next complaint, without reckognizing anything I said.

 

So why say anything at all?

 

My methodology, again, is flawless. 22% of the threads in General Discussions are locked. If you compare it to other steam forums, it does indeed speak for itself. It is valid to exclude the bug report and server forum etc. from study, I already layed out why. What do you have to interpret, when you compare 22% with < 10% of other forums? That 22 is a higher number than number lower than 10? No. The raw data speaks for itself.

[Kubikus]

Jedo, I have a proposal for you. When Sylent made his post, and I thought that his methodology was wrong, I countered it with a post where I examined the same thing - how many threads are locked. I, btw, did not make any statement about Sylent as a person, did not call him a liar, did not accuse him of trying to manipulate and so on. I just said that he made mistakes.

 

How about you do the same. You examine what I examined and you do it how you think it should be done. Make your own study to demonstrate how mine is flawed. But hurry, I have a feeling this thread will soon be locked. In that case, feel free to send me your results in a private message.

[Jedo]

But I honestly believe that, so it is not a lie...

 

I assume that you don't like me personally due to your personal remarks, that go on here. You imply I am dishonest, I try to manipulate people, I hide behind facts that are not facts.

 

You portray me as some kind of deceitful villain, and you seem determined to prove each and everything I say wrong, and you never acknowledge anything to be true. For example do you not accept that I am honest when I say I honestly believe my methodology is flawless. No, you insist it's a lie.

 

I see now what you are saying. My words were not as accurate as they should have been. I call it a "lie" because it is demonstrably false and you repeat it as fact simply because you don't believe the demonstration of your words as false. I suppose a better descriptor would be that you are wrong and stubbornly so, and your case will be misleading to others who read it uncritically. As for "hiding behind facts," plenty of emotional people do that, so it's not particularly onerous to be accused of it. People want to make their position seem stronger, so they appeal to other methods of argumentation to present that image of strength. Again, the problem is when people don't realize that this is what is happening; but it isn't necessarily sinister on the part of the person who does it.

 

Typical signs that it's personal and not about the matter. For example did you complain about me only using the first 15 pages of those other forums. I checked all the pages, and you did say nothing more about it. Went on to the next complaint, that I only checked 3 other forums. I could check 10 more, and you would simply move on to the next complaint, without reckognizing anything I said.

 

So why say anything at all?

 

You are right to say that I should acknowledge adjustments and improvements in the argument. The reason that I "move onto the next complaint" is because I didn't present the heaviest hitter first thing. If I can counter you with a simple point, then I will, but it isn't the last or best in the arsenal. With an argument as holey as yours (like many on this forum), there are plenty of counterpoints. If they satisfactorily answer one, then it's time to move onto the next one. *shrug* Eventually, I get tired and the other person is so stubborn that they won't admit that the points are valid (sound familiar?), and I give up on convincing them...

 

It does not, because the raw data does really speak for itself. 22% of the threads are locked. In other forums, it's a whole order of magnitude less. That speaks for itself. It does not need interpretation.

 

My methodology, again, is flawless. 22% of the threads in General Discussions are locked. If you compare it to other steam forums, it does indeed speak for itself. It is valid to exclude the bug report and server forum etc. from study, I already layed out why. What do you have to interpret, when you compare 22% with < 10% of other forums? That 22 is a higher number than number lower than 10? No. The raw data speaks for itself.

 

...Like I'm going to do here. Your methodology is not flawless, first of all, because no methodology ever is, but also because you don't have all of the information and your methodology can't account for that. For whatever reason, you refuse to see that the snapshot in time matters and that there are hundreds of thousands of other threads making your sample statistically insignificant. Yes, the results are self-explanatory, but the underlying data is not and requires interpretation...before you even get to results! The problems that I have pointed out with your approach are the same ones which would hamper my own study because there is no way for either of us to get around it.

 

So, like I tried to say before (albeit in different words which were freighted with connotations), keep claiming your own logical and scientific prowess, and I will keep pointing out the mistakes and assumptions which underlie your methods.

[Jedo]

I did mean to say, though, that I think your method is better than Sylen's, even if neither is particularly adequate. Of course, I never set out to compare the two, but maybe this will make you feel a little better.

[Kubikus]

I did mean to say, though, that I think your method is better than Sylen's, even if neither is particularly adequate. Of course, I never set out to compare the two, but maybe this will make you feel a little better.

 

That's sweet, but your approval has no influence on how I feel about myself. The point is that if you pretend that in all of what I say nothing is valid, it strongly suggests that you have an issue with me personally and don't even care about the subject. That you only lead a discussion about a subject, to leave an impression on my personally. And that's a waste of time, already because I'm not easily impressed.

 

I see now what you are saying. My words were not as accurate as they should have been. I call it a "lie" because it is demonstrably false and you repeat it as fact simply because you don't believe the demonstration of your words as false. I suppose a better descriptor would be that you are wrong and stubbornly so, and your case will be misleading to others who read it uncritically. As for "hiding behind facts," plenty of emotional people do that, so it's not particularly onerous to be accused of it. People want to make their position seem stronger, so they appeal to other methods of argumentation to present that image of strength. Again, the problem is when people don't realize that this is what is happening; but it isn't necessarily sinister on the part of the person who does it.

 

See, that's much better. Calling someone ignorant or stubborn is fine, because to a degree, we all are. Calling someone literally evil is no basis for a discussion, but for a prosecution.

 

You are right to say that I should acknowledge adjustments and improvements in the argument. The reason that I "move onto the next complaint" is because I didn't present the heaviest hitter first thing.

 

None of your comments hit heavier than the raw facts I present. You can't argue any of that away. Just, you know, btw.

 

If I can counter you with a simple point, then I will, but it isn't the last or best in the arsenal. With an argument as holey as yours (like many on this forum), there are plenty of counterpoints. If they satisfactorily answer one, then it's time to move onto the next one. *shrug* Eventually, I get tired and the other person is so stubborn that they won't admit that the points are valid (sound familiar?), and I give up on convincing them...

 

I do know the feeling. But see, when you say that looking only at the first 15 pages of the other forums (which I did because there are only 15 pages on the 7dtd forum and I wanted to use the same sample size) is erroneous, and then I accept your criticism and look at all the pages, I am being anything but stubborn. I'm being flexible and cooperative. But when I did what you considered the better method and found the same results, and you just drop it, it makes you look like you only said that thing to counter me. Personally. And when you see that it's not a factual counter, you drop it and move on.

 

I could, also just btw, make statistics for 100 other forums on steam and find similar numbers of locked threads. Percentages that are much lower than on the 7dtd forum.

 

...Like I'm going to do here. Your methodology is not flawless, first of all, because no methodology ever is,

 

Say I want to find out wether the light in the storeroom is on or off. My methodology would be to open the door. Where is the flaw in my methodology?

 

but also because you don't have all of the information and your methodology can't account for that. For whatever reason, you refuse to see that the snapshot in time matters and that there are hundreds of thousands of other threads making your sample statistically insignificant. Yes, the results are self-explanatory, but the underlying data is not and requires interpretation...before you even get to results! The problems that I have pointed out with your approach are the same ones which would hamper my own study because there is no way for either of us to get around it.

 

When I make a statistic of the currently available forum, right?, then I find it pretty obvious that my statistic is of the currently available forum,. I'm not talking about the forum as it was 5 or 4 or 3 or 2 or 1 year ago. But right now. Does that have to be pointed out and is not obvious..? Because I clearly say that I have checked the currently available pages in the "General Discussions" forum..? It does not make any sense to me, but for fun, I accept your criticism and add that I am examining the number of locked threads in the currently available forum.

 

What now?

 

What you can say is that the situation as it is now must not necessarily be the situation at some other point in time. And that is certainly true. Because now people are upset because the release of the A17 takes so long. That is the reason why so many threads are being locked these days.

[Telly G]

What Kubrik said about the information being hard to access is what I'm trying to say. It's not that it's hidden away, it's the devs make no real attempt to make the information known.

 

Even a link to this thread on the official twitter as a pinned tweet- > https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?87756-The-Official-A17-Developer-s-Diary-for-Developers would be appreciated. More people use twitter than go onto SCUD, and much less people come to this forum.

 

I know that I can find stuff on A17 if I look around. but I'm not the average schlub. Hell I backed the kickstarter, as you can see plainly. But most people don't even know its a kickstarter game, so a 'if you build it they will come' approach to the info doesnt cut it when the existing relevant links go to an endless storm of malaise. Why should the moderation staff be surprised in the slightest when people dont know what's going on with A17?

 

You can post in individual threads day in and day out links to the dev posts thread but unless it's stickied at the top of the more visited locations, people aren't gonna know what the hell is happening.

[SylenThunder]

What Kubrik said about the information being hard to access is what I'm trying to say. It's not that it's hidden away, it's the devs make no real attempt to make the information known.

 

Even a link to this thread on the official twitter as a pinned tweet- > https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?87756-The-Official-A17-Developer-s-Diary-for-Developers would be appreciated. More people use twitter than go onto SCUD, and much less people come to this forum.

 

I know that I can find stuff on A17 if I look around. but I'm not the average schlub. Hell I backed the kickstarter, as you can see plainly. But most people don't even know its a kickstarter game, so a 'if you build it they will come' approach to the info doesnt cut it when the existing relevant links go to an endless storm of malaise. Why should the moderation staff be surprised in the slightest when people dont know what's going on with A17?

 

You can post in individual threads day in and day out links to the dev posts thread but unless it's stickied at the top of the more visited locations, people aren't gonna know what the hell is happening.

I know nobody likes me right now, but just want to point this out.

 

[h=3]Sticky: Dev Tracker[/h]

Stickied at the top of the News and Announcements section. Which should be the section most people looking for news would go to naturally.

 

There is also the relatively often updated first two posts of the current Dev Diary thread that contain a full list of known information, along with links to relevant posts for more information.

[SnowDog1942]

I know nobody likes me right now, but just want to point this out.

 

I like you. Am I nobody?

[RestInPieces]

I know nobody likes me right now, but just want to point this out.

 

I'll like you if you stop moving suggestion-related threads to the pimp dream section, so that we have something more interesting to discuss...

[Roland]

Stop putting suggestions in the suggestion box Sylen! Especially since nobody can have a discussion there.

[moonshiel]

Nvm it doesn't matter. . . ill just join the band wagon. . . . hey maybe you should figure out how to do weapon skins i liked the clear shotgun

[RestInPieces]

Stop putting suggestions in the suggestion box Sylen! Especially since nobody can have a discussion there.

 

Yeah, they can like start a discussion with themselves! Come on Roland we all know that section is a graveyard where threads go to die.

[Roland]

Yeah, they can like start a discussion with themselves! Come on Roland we all know that section is a graveyard where threads go to die.

 

Not if we could convince Kubikus, Meganoth, and Jedo to go post there...

[SylenThunder]

Not if we could convince Kubikus, Meganoth, and Jedo to go post there...

They were there once. It killed the thread.

 

 

Seriously though RestInPieces, suggestions belong in the Pimp dreams section. That is the entire purpose of that forum section.

 

Maybe you can try training fellow forum goers to actually look somewhere other than General Discussion. That's the real problem.

[Jedo]

<snip>

 

You said it best:

 

It's just too much ad hominem and too little reason. As usual.

 

--------

 

Maybe you can try training fellow forum goers to actually look somewhere other than General Discussion. That's the real problem.

 

I don't really go look anywhere. Usually I see that Roland has posted somewhere, go to see whether his post was witty or putting people in their place, and sometimes I get sucked into that discussion. (Believe it or not, I leave a lot of them alone.)

 

The point is: blame Roland.

[RestInPieces]

They were there once. It killed the thread.

 

 

Seriously though RestInPieces, suggestions belong in the Pimp dreams section. That is the entire purpose of that forum section.

 

Maybe you can try training fellow forum goers to actually look somewhere other than General Discussion. That's the real problem.

 

Hmm besides disguising suggestion threads as general discussion topics, (nsfw links warning) maybe I could try making my posts like this to train people to visit the pimp dreams section more often.

[Kubikus]

I know nobody likes me right now, but just want to point this out.

 

[h=3]Sticky: Dev Tracker[/h]

Stickied at the top of the News and Announcements section. Which should be the section most people looking for news would go to naturally.

 

There is also the relatively often updated first two posts of the current Dev Diary thread that contain a full list of known information, along with links to relevant posts for more information.

 

The dev tracker is somewhat better than following that thread and I used it occasionally, but it's inconvenient. Even when you bookmark the tracker itself, you have to find the dev you're interested in, then it does not even show the full post, so you have to click again to get to the actual thread and you only get a few of their recent posts and then not everything a dev writes is automatically interesting or relevant.

 

Roland's approach is much better, it's just one thread and then you can scroll through all the posts. It's still not the bee's knee, because you have chatty posts and jokes and irony that kinda distract, sometimes you don't really understand the context, particularly when the post, that the dev responds to, is not quoted.

 

People - "everybody" knows that - are used to getting information served on a silver platter. If you're the one who's expected to serve, that's inconvenient for you, I understand. But usually you are the one who makes a living off of those expecting people, so... It's a pretty good idea if you follow current conventions. And if you're a multi-million dollar company, particularly when you never get tired reminding people that you are, people will never accept that you don't spend a couple k's per year to provide an expectable service.

 

So I can assure y'all that there are two way you can approach the information issue: #1 give a damn and say so, like Roland does every now and then. #2 do as I layed out earlier in this thread.

 

 

Not if we could convince Kubikus, Meganoth, and Jedo to go post there...

 

Ha ha you have 12,000 posts Roland maybe you should post there. But seriously the suggestion forum is merely a decorative element at this point.

 

 

They were there once. It killed the thread.

 

Actually, you killed the thread. It's kinda weird if you think about it, guys talking, along comes another guy like "nuff already". Why not just move off topic posts to the off topic forum.

 

Forbidding people to talk is a concept that is generally frowned upon. It's particularly delicate if there is an ongoing issue or controversy, as it tends to look like the company wants to suppress criticism, so potential new customers are not alienated. Many find that borders at deception.

 

 

You said it best:

 

It's just too much ad hominem and too little reason. As usual.

 

This is what "ad hominem" means:

 

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

 

We were having a bit of a personal conversation, so much is true, but I don't attack you.

 

But of course I'm perfectly fine to end the "discussion" with you, let's say we have different understandings what "reason" and "argument" means.

[Jedo]

This is what "ad hominem" means:

 

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

 

...but I don't attack you.

 

I'll guess you'll have to explain to me how the following, your first reply to my questions about your methodology (questions which contained zero ad hominem), are not an attack against me rather than against my argument:

Because you don't like the outcome...

 

...as always, I was simply being objective.

 

Apparently, my response was motivated by personal preference, and you reinforced the difference between us as persons (not in our arguments) by claiming that you were completely objective.

 

Please, tell me more about this ad hominem that you don't do.

[Kubikus]

I'll guess you'll have to explain

I'm pretty sure I don't have to respond to your little remarks where you select what you respond to and what you ignore. Particularly when you decide to ignore my factual arguments whenever they are inconvenient to you.

 

I am also pretty sure that you will have the last word now, because contrary to the legend that I always respond to everything, I am finally done with you, as you fail to meet my minimum standards of communication.