Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Sexy can at least MAKE an argument, no matter his crass. You? You're the guy who would attribute an event he doesn't understand to a previous event via association. You're the kind of guy who needs to have EVERY event and piece of symbolism narrated for him for it to be considered true. "Malak didn't SAY he was toying with Revan, so he must not be". Neither did Palpatine, but that doesn't mean he wasn't. You're stubborn, but unjustifiably so.
Yeah! Because "toying" is the only way to interpret Malak's actions. Given all available information, given all the available possibilities. Malak must only have been toying with Revan.
You're essentiall calling me stubborn for refusing to accept one in many interpretations of two virtual non-events (yes non events when measured against the totality of their conflict).
Beyond this, it was even the crux of Advent's argument, which was that Revan and co. felt Malak was too much. No such evidence or statement exists.