Sure I do. Which is why when someone says Come at me (name) it's an obvious play on Come at me bro. This is a simple term of internet jargon, and it is totally eluding you.
No, I got that, it's just dumb. The point is, 'irony' doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.
You mean like Stormbringer, Master of Logic?
I didn't make that claim, nor do I now. On the other hand, your cohort... sorry, I mean 'group'... seems to think they have the absolute lock on it. In fact, you have repeatedly claimed to have superior knowledge and structure, but have failed to demonstrate even the basics of 'discussion' or 'argumentation'.
So would this be like continuously missing very obvious points, or like you thinking I have no idea what I am talking about, or...?
I don't
think you have no idea what you are talking about, you demonstrate this on a continual basis. For example, you say you forgot more about D&D than the rest of us know, then make a claim that haste requires a system shock roll by RAW. The rules are actually vague about it, so you had to find a throw-away one liner from a two decade old archived article detailing some of the changes from 1e to 2e. But nothing else, like even a Sage Advice article that claims the same thing. While those articles are notoriously unreliable, it would at least be something one of the game designers would have written, rather than a marketing or PR flack jotted down, perhaps from a second hand memo on the subject.
But here's why I believe you don't know what 'irony' is. While demanding adherence to RAW under just about any circumstance, and fetishizing the RAW itself, once you are challenged on your perceptions, you find yourself ranging far afield of RAW to supply even the weakest of evidence to support your contention. I mean, there is a decent argument to be made for both sides; Brendon and Benoist both made one. And you couldn't even recognize the merits of either of those or find some way to support
those arguments, let alone devise and construct one of your own.
So would this be like you thinking you are a good player and a good person despite all evidence suggesting the contrary?
You have provided no evidence to support any contention you have ever made here. I am pretty sure you would be unable to provide evidence regarding this contention as well, even if it existed.
I will give you a chance, though, as kind of a freebie; no having to research on your part. I ran
Castle Amber as a PbP that went for 922 posts. One could reasonably conclude that makes for a pretty successful session. You are welcome to start up your own PbP thread and see if you can top 921 responses.
And this is why you refuse to improve. The truth burns. Burn bitch, burn.
I figured when you tried to explain your rationale for 'no u' in your first post or two, it rang pretty hollow. This is further evidence of that.