>>44193128>you said that it went retard the moment it divorced from the semantic meaning which was literally the entire history of the franchise.I never meant otherwise.
>Because that's not what the discussion is about, you decided it's about that because you want it to.Not necessarily, you're free to go back to talking about whatever you want. I objected to being referred to as someone who isn't aware of TPC's stance on legendaries and mythicals in
>>44190932, and felt I should inform you otherwise (I just don't respect that stance at all because it's semantically inaccurate and thus kinda silly. Kinda like how at some point TPC started using the term "forme" when naming various different forms a specific Pokemon species could take. Even though the word "form" could have sufficed for the time being just fine, but TPC needed a bullshit new term they could freely define/change definitions of as they see fit). You're free to not reply anymore... unless you really want to.
