Thread:Wolverine-Man/@comment-3035019-20161015095813/@comment-26451616-20161015193242

Wolverine-Man wrote: NANOMACHINES was stating his opinions like it was a fact. And as I said, opinions are not facts. That's called wanking a character when it's flat out proven another character would beat said character (Yes, it's his opinion, but he didn't have to treat it like a fact, which is why I didn't respect it). And it was a fact that Sub-Zero VS Glacius was preferred over the underrated Ken VS Sub-Zero, even though Ken and Sub-Zero were more similar (Before you say anything, I didn't respect their opinions that they wanted/thought Ken VS Terry and Sub-Zero VS Glacius are better than Ken VS Sub-Zero, but they treated their opinions like facts, which is why I didn't respect them. Not saying that it's a fact that Ken VS Sub-Zero is better than both of them, it just had more similarities than them, which is why I wanted it/prefered it over Ken VS Terry and Sub-Zero VS Glacius). I'm sorry for doing this and like I said, I promise to behave. Can you forgive me and can we just forget about this and be on good terms? (Talking to you, Nocturn, because the rest of this comment was directed at Micky) Nano wasn't. If you're talking about the image, the one that said "Shadow should have beaten Mewtwo" in that case, you were being stupid. One: "In my opinion Shadow should have beaten Mewtwo" wouldn't fit on that image. Two: People usually don't say "in my opinion" because it's generally excepted here that when someone says "X should have won" they mean it's their opinion that the other person should have won. Three: If you ASKED Nano, he would have said why he thinks Shadow, calling it wanking when you clearly don't know about Shadow is a stupid thing to say.

No, they didn't treat it like facts, they fought Ken VS Sub-Zero is a bad idea, but what I said in point two goes for ideas too. But the thing is, you still treated your opinion like fact, you know what "literally" means, right?