Go to https://displate.com/l/matttt (discount is automatically applied at the checkout) or use my code matttt to get: 26% off for 1 Displates, 31% off for ...
A ‘maybe’ (IMO) is an implication that a person is exploring an idea of something, just like putting an idea out there to see how it floats. In any case, in no shape, or way did I do the following:
…suggest that Tove’s real reason for refusing him, was not being interested in working “that hard” to realize her vision.
That is hardly an outrageous paraphrasing. The reason I used it was illustrate a fairly obvious adverse interpretation of what you wrote, which you probably missed.
A ‘maybe’ (IMO) is an implication that a person is exploring an idea of something
You felt that pointing out Walt Disney’s more industrious methods around art was on the strong side. You also went on to dismiss this as the reason Tove would have been uninterested in working with Disney, and instead floated the idea that Disney was too much of a “hassle” for her.
I reinforced my view on the first and added why the second was a pretty tactless take.
At this point you assumed I held a bunch of positions I don’t, to which I replied with a correction.
After that you’ve pretty much just been splitting hairs on my actual position.
To you, being normal “for the time” is an excuse. To me, it is not.
A ‘maybe’ (IMO) is an implication that a person is exploring an idea of something, just like putting an idea out there to see how it floats. In any case, in no shape, or way did I do the following:
Not what I said at all, mate.
That is hardly an outrageous paraphrasing. The reason I used it was illustrate a fairly obvious adverse interpretation of what you wrote, which you probably missed.
Yes. A “suggestion” if you will.
So, end of the day… you’re trying to scorch me for proposing an idea…?
Were lightly toasting each other, at most.
You felt that pointing out Walt Disney’s more industrious methods around art was on the strong side. You also went on to dismiss this as the reason Tove would have been uninterested in working with Disney, and instead floated the idea that Disney was too much of a “hassle” for her.
I reinforced my view on the first and added why the second was a pretty tactless take.
At this point you assumed I held a bunch of positions I don’t, to which I replied with a correction.
After that you’ve pretty much just been splitting hairs on my actual position.
To you, being normal “for the time” is an excuse. To me, it is not.
Excellent point. Yeah, you may be right.
See earlier post.