Originally posted by: coldy07
@maazkalim
Okay. I'll be honest. I had to read your post twice to try and decipher your message and I hope I've got that right. 😆
This is what I gather from your post. You disagree with the topic/post/title, and feel it was not fate that decided it all. Maybe you mean to say Imaan had a choice? Also you seem not very fond of Salim. I am quite neutral when it comes to characters. Basically you want the title of the post changed. But I really need to know your insight on the same.
Also I do reply to posts. So hope that's cleared. 😃
Okay, o-khay...!!! 😆 Frankly speaking, I was not in a perfect frame-of-mind to 'craft' "constructive-"replies, especially considering the detailing in it. And I even had a [somewhat] faint-feeling that elaborating that much may cause confusion to you, but I mostly tend to create responses with universal-appeal when communicating on publicly-accessible Internet platforms than thinking only about the person/entity I'm addressing [to] except where I'm personally involved. That being said, I forsake elaboration only when I think doing so has very-high chances of being'-advantageous' to me. Otherwise, my wisdom says that I can get stuck in clarifying doubts of various nature of forumites at any given times which could really be 'painful' if you already have plethora of "bad-luck" in such activites (obviously, I've had experiences). And moreover, because many "active-users" tend to ignore relevant-points related to the topic posted in other threads (as reaffirmed in my latest-interactions), I've had to further increase its (that post) length by adding some-points in the hope that in a vastly-diverse environment like Internet forums and moreover, social media where if you're spotted "daring" to put your steps anywhere near what-is-perceived to be "the wrong-side", you just have to brace-up and "face-the-music" since it greatly varies by factors such as whom and how many people you've [unintentionally (obviously)] "offended" and how much "sensitive" that topic is perceived[-as]. So few of the points where added as a 'Disclaimer-cum-Clarification' since it can't be expected from any "offended-"user to visit any relevant thread where I've already posted my reasonings over why my points may appear as adversarial-against-any-random-character just based on the premise (i.e. what would be perceived-as "fact" by concerned-parties at least unless proven otherwise) that I've not criticised, or praised some other character[s] when purportedly, similar-factors were present/there. That basically disclaims answerability to any user who gets offended by my remarks because I might've criticised his/her favourite character, or for the same-scenario praised someone who might be [situationally] termed as competitor/foe/rival of that favourite character, no matter how rationally or irrationally I have expressed something ('fanpanti'). That being said, it also includes a subtle-hint to civilly (if not politely 😉) ask for my take on some-other, past random-topics for which I've not expressed anything (most-likely due to that "self-imposed policy" "thingy"). So, Really Sorry in case you faced any "inconvenience" in 'decoding' my 'code-language'. 😛
Okay, so that "one-last-stuff" is actually the response to your interpretation of my post. 'Luckily-'enough, you've got my message [somewhat] almost-right and I'm gonna clarify what was right or not for the most of your interpretations. 👍🏼 Yes, I absolutely do disagree from the title of this thread and haven't or won't resent your point because that might be "just"-your-"opinion". As indicated in the ""res"-notice", if you've got to read my original-post [once] again, you might've noticed I mostly used the term "'Subject Folder'[sic]" because that's technically the name of that "form-field"* in which/where one fetches the title of his/her thread, whether common or opinion-poll. That basically implies that my issue is only with the title and therefore, you've got it [almost-]perfect that "it was not fate that decided it all[sic]". Again, I would say, as indicated in that [original-]post, unless one is adamant on finding 'spiritual-'connect with the events portrayed in that episode (obviously, I would've to include the 'manner' in which they were shown), there was no connection with the "fate[sic]" at all. And in response to your interpretation about my view towards Imaan for that event and my feelings for Salim, I'm gonna respond just that it really brought a smile to my face [when I read it for the first-time]. Now "why so" is left upon you and fellow readers to interpret since I'm not gonna clarify that at least until the time when one would still can't interpret accurately upon reading my 'analysis'. Now, moving-on the next. As already indicated in the previous para[graph] ("preface") here, by the phrase "as-long-as they simply remain [completely-]rational and free-of any irrelevant-bias [towards particular characters][sic]", I intended to disclaim my answerability towards those who basically carry that "fan"[-type of] mentality and therefore, have difficulties in either acknowledging or even tolerating when they can't rationally-contest rationales not in favour of/adversarial towards their interests. So, I hope that you must've got my point that believing upon your words, it wasn't directly/essentially addressed to you [as I repeat: "I type my messages bearing everyone-who-may-read-this in my mind"]. Now, next...! Hunh...?? 😲 So you got my point absolutely-correct, then why that confusion-sentiment expressed initially?? 😕 Is it 'just because', like me, you're very thoughtful while "penning-down" replies and therefore, take time? And due to your "honesty-mode", you thought of including both of your thoughts i.e. the one when you started typing, and the second/last one when you've almost finished typing after "multiple-sessions of reading" you "had to do" [while typing/on 'Post Reply' page]?? 😛 😆 Now, next is about "the main-thing"...! 😃 Thanks for understanding my concern and yes, from the time since I originally intended to do so until the time I read your response, my 'brainstorming' urged me to rationally-elaborate my take on every inconsistency spotted since the time Naz "made up the mind" to "move-on" (literally: move-back 😉) with Imaan (by divulging it to Salim in presence of Shaira, which he fully-supported [as usual] and even urged [her] to forget [about] himself) till the time of Salim's "demise" in shortest-possible elaboration [per my standards] (by obviously omitting most of the 'technical-'aspects 😒). But since reading your response, I guess including enough-details in a single-post [without much of differential-formatting] may cause 'great-'confusion to a vast sect of readers and therefore, have decided to majorly** cover the events portrayed in that episode. But since I "dunno" whether you'll agree with my wordings or not (I'm not an "Antaryaami" like Imaan, not even conditionally like Naz and Salim 😉) regardless of your [valid-]contestation or non-contention of them, I prefer to post that 'private'ly (i.e. via PM 😆) than publicly for your "approval" since once I post it and in [an uneventful] case, you reject it (my actual request) summarily, I would've no point to post the same-thing [again] separately by creating a whole-new thread with the kind of title I deem [to be] 'fair' (i.e. which neither undermines nor exaggerates). It would "make no sense" to me and moreover, to readers. 😳
And that "certain period-of-time[sic]" was just a notice to inform you that since it's in your control and your right to whether reply or not reply, I think it's my right to wait for your response only for limited-time [so that it doesn't get that much late that my 'analysis' would look obsolete or 'better', I just decide to "scrap" the idea ('as always' 😆 😒)]. In short, it's an [unclear] 'ultimatum' (😉)/deadline-notice, think of it as a notice on college-boards or better, those marketing-offers saying: "Valid till stocks last". 😊
Hoping I would've gotten successful in clearing almost all of the doubts expressed. And yes, that "countdown-notice" will continue running for our communications till final-outcome, with some obvious exceptions (as I exercised hours ago). 😃
*A small, horizontal-boxes found nearly everywhere in computing, where you could input text with limited character-space. Used everywhere ranging from websites (most commonly) to softwares (mostly called nowadays as "apps" when it comes to mobility-devices) mainly for users to respond with their names, contact details, some specific short-info to maximum character-limit usage applications for postal addresses. I'm sure you have noticed plenty of them on any random-page of IF too, mostly on posting, editing and profile-management pages.
**Obviously I would've to include necessary references from preceding/previous episodes too since it's a daily-series where you can't expect every big-thing to take place in a single-episode, alongwith some other pop-cultural references. 😉
P.S. Oh, so you technically "amped-up" your original-post exactly post 48 hours of its submittal. 🤓 Hmmm... 👏 How did you [ensured to] do that?? Have you put "auto-responders at work" or what kind of 'magic' was that...?? Please tell... ❓ [_/\_]
Thanks dear, for doing the job on my part. 😊 In fact, I wasn't so-sure about this abbreviation itself and thought of replying with the same answer but disclaiming that it shouldn't be construed as accurate. It's simple why is that, like many other abbreviations/short-forms, I learned this from online-forums like IF itself since one doesn't use such vocabulary in offline-/'real-'world.
P.S. Also, I've been noticing your posts since longtime and willing to respond to the recent ones, for now, just saying that will do get back to you ASAP (read: few-days). 😉
Edited by maazkalim - 7 years ago
comment:
p_commentcount