Katawa Shoujo Forums

Zarys wrote:
Just to remind it to already be doing, so it's a bit pointless to criticize it in front of me.

"He took my advice, not yours. Therefore my advice was best! EAT IT YOU LOSER COWARDS!"

And again, I don't say that he must no accept it, I just think that the limit before becoming a stalker is many much more higher than you said.

Like... say... 600 emails?

And there is maybe a little difference between seed 600 mails after 3 days, go in her house,ect...and what Elessar did.
This only proves that it is a matter of proportions and the behavior of Elessar has nothing of a stalker; where this guy in the Denko Saga act just absurdly when Denko was obviously at least friendly before he become scary.

The crazy Denko guy had to start somewhere! 600 is an extreme example, but it's still an example of the general idea behind 'maybe you should just stop?'

And I don't really understand why suddenly cut all contact without explanation is more OK than risk being a little insistant ? sorry but I will not set what I think and how I behave (and so what I advice to think and behave) since paranoids that think that all guys are rapers* or from extrem examples (that are certainly troll)
I think you makes a big deal with a really little thing that I find perfectly normal.

This has nothing to do with thinking all guys are rapists! It has everything to do with someone who isn't responding for a reason.

I really have the impress to be the reasonable person here.

This is the root of the problem. You are so absolutely sure of yourself that you can't relate to how anyone else would feel. We're all cowards and losers because you think you should keep messaging someone who isn't responding, even after well over a month. The person who isn't responding certainly won't mind getting more messages, because as far as you're concerned they need to be won over and convinced.

*Come on, if the genders were reversed, would you really think that a girl who seed a invitation to a guy after 2-3 unanswered messages in a mouth is a stalker ? not most people, I think, most would thinks that she is well-intentionned, misses sincerely her friend and even that he is a asshole to forgive her; and here most of you claims that he is a stalker or almost a potential rapist and she is too weak to endure a last invitation where her will is gently demanded; I don't think that all guys are potential rapists and that womans are so weak. (and I find it degrading for them)

If a girl dosent respond to you after a couple tries, she isnt interested in talking to you, simple as that really.

Sidenote, this is only the case if she has "Seen" the message on facebook, or you know had read the text, etc. But even then more than a few is a bit extreme.

Well, what is the "acceptable" limit for you ? I don't really see.

Zarys wrote:Well, what is the "acceptable" limit for you ? I don't really see.

If youve sent about 3 messages with 0 replies, just stop, if they want to reply, they will.

CoffeeDrive wrote:

Zarys wrote:Well, what is the "acceptable" limit for you ? I don't really see.

If youve sent about 3 messages with 0 replies, just stop, if they want to reply, they will.

How you know it ? That don't seem so clear to me, though I don't think be particularly dense.
It's like the Pascal's wager :

• She don't like him + he try = +b-0
  She like him + he try = +b+∞
  She like him + he don't try = -b-0
  She don't like him + he don't try = -b-0

Where b is the negative things that could happens (and the stress, effort implied) if he try : she would still don't answer (negligible), or she would says not what is clarify the situation. (so it would even be an gain)
So try is the most logical because he will whether 1) loss nothing, (-0) 2) whether gain a helpfull clarification (+1), or 3) wheter find Love (+∞)
Where try nothing will necessarily be equal to 0. (the worst resultat of try)

Nothing can be loss ! he is inevitably the winner !

metalangel wrote:
This has nothing to do with thinking all guys are rapists! It has everything to do with someone who isn't responding for a reason.

And you dont know what, so it's logical to try again to give her a opportunity to says what she thinks.

metalangel wrote:
This is the root of the problem. You are so absolutely sure of yourself that you can't relate to how anyone else would feel. We're all cowards and losers because you think you should keep messaging someone who isn't responding, even after well over a month. The person who isn't responding certainly won't mind getting more messages, because as far as you're concerned they need to be won over and convinced.

Really? yet I'm the only one to tell that she might hesitate while with your insurance you tells that it's impossible, and even if you're right, the consequences cannot be bad.
Why assume she would see him as a stalker is logicial ? why not be romantic ? it would be sad to prevent him to try a soo cute story....where try would cost NOTHING.

Ah, the utterly misguided belief that persistence in the face of a lack of response is somehow "romantic", combined with an utter lack of consideration for her feelings about the matter.

That isn't romantic, that's self-centered and creepy.

Except that what Elessar did is not really terribly "persistent"...
I am the only one to have read what have writen Elessar (especially the relationship between him and her) ? obviously be a stalker is not romantic...but I don't think he is a stalker. (I just said to metangel why is so pessimistic and not more romantic)

Zarys wrote:
And you dont know what, so it's logical to try again to give her a opportunity to says what she thinks.

She's already had two opportunities. Why should it become someone else's problem that you don't take no for an answer?

Really? yet I'm the only one to tell that she might hesitate while with your insurance you tells that it's impossible, and even if you're right, the consequences cannot be bad.
Why assume she would see him as a stalker is logicial ? why not be romantic ? it would be sad to prevent him to try a soo cute story....where try would cost NOTHING.

In the face of overwhelming opposition to your suggestion, warnings that it risks becoming criminal, you are still persisting with this fantasy that it's a cute little romance comedy. I feel really sorry for any girls you might pursue who'll have to put up with these scary delusions. I'm curious how much experience you having with dating and relationships and romance but that would involve real life stories which are inadmissable as evidence on KSOF. I even was, by coincidence, told a good story by a co-worker yesterday about a bad first (and last) date and the steps they took afterwards to ensure they'd never have any contact with that person ever again.

There is NOTHING "ROMANTIC" ABOUT REPEATED UNSOLICITED CONTACT OF ANY KIND. Get it through your head.

metalangel wrote:
In the face of overwhelming opposition to your suggestion, warnings that it risks becoming criminal, you are still persisting with this fantasy that it's a cute little romance comedy. I feel really sorry for any girls you might pursue who'll have to put up with these scary delusions. I'm curious how much experience you having with dating and relationships and romance but that would involve real life stories which are inadmissable as evidence on KSOF. I even was, by coincidence, told a good story by a co-worker yesterday about a bad first (and last) date and the steps they took afterwards to ensure they'd never have any contact with that person ever again.

Says that (s)he is not interrested to a new date ? avoid someone without explanation is not also a very wealthy behavior I think...

Have you never been on such a bad date that you never wanted to see that person ever ever again?

In this case, wheter you don't have given any possibility of contact, wheter at least you says that you are not interresterd if you don't want the "horror" of receving a message, it's because you don't have appreciate a person you have the right to act like it ? in this case the dated person is as much disturbing as this person.

And I suppose that this person was just normaly unpleasant, not a raper or something like that; as we knows, Elessar was decent.

Zarys wrote:In this case, wheter you don't have given any possibility of contact, wheter at least you says that you are not interresterd if you don't want the "horror" of receving a message, it's because you don't have appreciate a person you have the right to act like it ? in this case the dated person is as much disturbing as this person.

Are you saying that person who was really freaked out is as much at fault as the person they wanted to immediately cut all ties with?

I am suspicious of what most people called "bad date", and yes give your callphone and all is stupid if you want to cut all ties, a explicit "not" is nore more effeciant against the stalkers ? I've never gone without warning and strangely I have never been a victim of what you speak, perhaps there is a link betwwen the two facts ?
And you talked about a "bad date" not a harasser, you have said to don't talk about rapists or something like that...always absurd and unrelevent examples...

Zarys wrote:I am suspicious of what most people called "bad date"

How much experience do you have?

and yes give your callphone and all is stupid if you want to cut all ties, a explicit "not" is nore more effeciant against the stalkers ?

Says the guy who won't take no for an answer because ROMANCE.

And you talked about a "bad date" not a harasser, you have said to don't talk about rapists or something like that...always absurd and unrelevent examples...

Whoa whoa whoa, a bad date = a rapist? What is it with you and rapists? How is my case of two people who went out and one didn't want to see the other person again and cut contact irrelevant vs this one that started all this, of two people who went out and one didn't want to see the other and cut contact?

If it's only a bad date (You just disliked the person) why don't simply says "not" ? everyone you don't like is a freak or what ?