tis true it is the implication, but since we are using it as a "be-all, end-all" canon statement, it COULD be interpreted the opposite way, thus blunting its unarguability.
no, not as big. it is an offense, to be sure, but certainly not to the point of ignoring its existence. If it were actually a person with a viewpoint, then what you said is true, but since it is text on a page, it, in-and-of itself is not offended, and opening debate over the meaning of the text merely calls into question the small point that can be debated, not the popular interpretation.
"On neutral ground of all the other jedi perhaps only Mace Windu could be his equal"
Its quite clear what that means... And that is that AT BEST Mace could be Dooku's Equal.. And no other Jedi (except Yoda whom he was fighting) in fair circumstances would have been Dooku's eqaul at that time(6 months before ROTS).. Of course we know 6 months later Anakin surpassed Dooku, and was more than his equal.
i didn't criticize your word choice. I agreed with it. But because you didn't understand this sentence you didn't get that. let me explain.
I agreed, yes, it is an offense to do what i did, because any simpleton can read the sentence and come to the conclusion of what the author MEANT by the "perhaps... only his equal" quote.
I then that the offense I committed was not as bad as if I had ignored the existence of the source entirely. (which would have been a worse offense!)
That this ploy succeeded has realigned my default from "no ur dum y r u so rong?" and "well, he's probably not dumb, so I'll interpret for him" to [officially] "What do you mean by this?" Things are easier when not facing an enemy.
Hopefully this will allow the level of discourse to increase. (Freeing my immature sniping time up for use against the local paper, which is terrible.)
Nov 3rd, 2009 01:10 AM
