>>437
First of all, I really disagree with a lot of the shit you just said, but I don't know if I should really pursue this conversation. I'll try to keep it terse and pertinent to my noticing that you ignored me.
>Can you provide context to what the writing was like?
>>I couldn't understand what you were asking for at all, nor did I think I really had the answer you were looking for anyway. That other guy you asked context from also got confused. Anyway, I just ignored it since I didn't get it.
This entire thread has been huge blueballs for me. I really didn't think I was asking too much by trying to have context besides copy-pasting tags. I guess I'll largely back off from this thread, because I feel I pursued it so hard, but was ultimately, only ever met with nothing. Or at least not enough.
>You like ferals but not furries?
>>This isn't really inquiring about scope, this is just a confirmation question that would warrant a yes/no. I already made it apparent my tastes on the matter, so that would be pretty pointless.
This is where I'm gonna abstain from acknowledging and responding to every point, because, believe me I would, but I don't think it's fair to the board, or the thread topic.
I don't mean to be passive-aggressive. But you seem to imply being a "mid-functioning autistic" is observable in one's literature, and is a rational slight. I've seen this criticism before, and I've seen people articulate it in a meaningful way. I grant it as fair, for my own reasons, and for granting subjective opinions to a certain extent, anyway.
But conversation is a give and take. I wasn't writing a letter that takes time to send, and time to receive a reply, where I might've formatted it to more literally communicate my expectations. Had you responded at all, I would've continued pursuing that line of conversation, but if nothing else, I offered my own opinion, which of course (given context of me) grounds the subject matter in geometry. You could've-
I don't know, man. Again, I don't mean to be passive-aggressive, but to me this was a fundamental failure in acknowledging social cues, and acknowledging the simple expectation of wanting to hold a conversation. I don't understand how I have to explain this to you, while you slight literature for being written by autists.