6366177

Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. And unless I'm sorely mistaken, that's exactly what wlam was saying too.

That is, in fact, exactly what I was saying, and the sheer bother of having to construct something like that is one of the big reasons why few people ever try.

6366253

Which felt like he was trying to restrict me at the time.

He does have a point about reading comprehension there. You should go less with what you feel people are saying and try a bit harder to understand what people actually are saying, because I said pretty clearly that I was just laying out the reasons for why this is an uncommon approach to world-building that requires a lot of time and effort to get right.

6366253

Honestly I think you might need to, this is the second time you've misunderstood me.

I think it's more likely that you have trouble putting your thoughts to words. Given both "misunderstandings" were brought about by taking what you wrote as what you meant.

6366664

Which felt like he was trying to restrict me at the time.

Did the two of you miss that point on the end? I already understand it. People make mistakes all the time, which is why we tried to clear it up, and I did. A simple mistake doesn't mean I need to fix my reading comprehension, it just means I made a mistake. Let it go.

6366738

I think it's more likely that you have trouble putting your thoughts to words. Given both "misunderstandings" were brought about by taking what you wrote as what you meant.

This all started with you making a ridiculous assumption about something I wrote. I don't think I need help because of that.

6366796
This all started because you said that it's "petty" to remind people of the fact that history exists.

6368505
That's not what I said or meant and you know it.

6368505
Listen it's starting to get a bit tense between us. Let's just try and forgive and forget. I feel like we've both said a few things that may have offended the other. Let's try and let this go. I'm sorry.

6368734

That's not what I said or meant and you know it.

I'm sorry, but that's exactly what you said.

Your initial question was:

Why are humans always the past? Why not the future?

Wlam answered your question with:

Because we know for a fact that none of these things actually exist, that there was no point at which our world ever looked even remotely like theirs, and that it just plain makes no sense to have them be part of our world's past...

To which you replied:

I think I'm honestly gonna disagree with you. Your reasoning feels a bit petty...

If you didn't mean it, you shouldn't have said it.

Listen it's starting to get a bit tense between us. Let's just try and forgive and forget. I feel like we've both said a few things that may have offended the other. Let's try and let this go. I'm sorry.

I'm honestly only slightly bemused by all of this. But if you want to give it a rest, I'm fine with that.

I'd say, since it'd be a work of fiction anyway, I'd think that it's not entirely uncompatible.

There's always going the Illusion of Gaia route. IoG gives us a fantasy-heavy world, with all sorts of stuff you wouldn't see on real Earth, and then the game ends with all that turning into mid-1990's Real Earth (or meant to be like our Earth, anyway), complete with landmass shifting as the continents weren't shaped like our Earth's. Of course, by the game's plot, the Earth was that like first, then turned into what we see in the game, then shifted back. But it doesn't mean that a similar work of fiction can't drop the first bit if reusing that plot.

As I mentioned, it's all fiction, anyway... but well, if the matter has been dropped, it's been dropped...

6369289
Yeah, it's of course completely possible to do a story like that. It just means you actually have to go the whole distance and come up with a number good answers for how and why all of that happened.

6368941
I don't like leaving things unfinished, so I'll try one more time to show you why you're wrong.

I think I'm honestly gonna disagree with you. Your reasoning feels a bit petty...

You claim this is where I said remembering history is petty. This might be how you interpret it, but just because you read it that way doesn't mean that it is what I said. My response never mentioned history or how I felt about it, that was an assumption on your part. My response stated that I believe using history as a reason to say the story is flawed or bad is a little petty considering that magical ponies throw a lot of reality out of the window. At the time I hadn't really thought much about making the history match since I don't think the idea needed to be set on our Earth per se so I felt like Wlam was saying the idea couldn't work except in a fantasy story. I'll admit I misunderstood Wlam there, but we worked it out.

6374215

My response never mentioned history or how I felt about it, that was an assumption on your part.

Wlam's reasoning for why a story involving humans evolving after the events of the show couldn't realistically work was because history exists. You said that reasoning was petty. In other words, you said that history existing is a petty reason to not write such a story.

You can hem and haw and pontificate about intentions and assumptions all day, but that is the actual, factual meaning of the words you posted in this thread.

At the time I hadn't really thought much about making the history match since I don't think the idea needed to be set on our Earth per se

That premise was set up in the OP of this thread. So if you're the one who put it aside, you can hardly be upset when people assume that you're talking about that context.