To those who do not read maybe. I've seen some good arguments around, but too often people are unwilling to read or consider them. The last one I was in, someone kept saying I was saying "Ulfric was right because he is right", even though I was giving evidence, support, and valid reasons for my arguments:

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1481768-why-does-ulfric-want-to-be-high-king/?p=23211209

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1481768-why-does-ulfric-want-to-be-high-king/?p=23211220

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1481768-why-does-ulfric-want-to-be-high-king/?p=23211225

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1481768-why-does-ulfric-want-to-be-high-king/?p=23211241

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1481768-why-does-ulfric-want-to-be-high-king/?p=23211244

He never did bother showing me an example. He just refused to look at the argument presented.

It's more than common for people to ignore the good arguments and throw biased arguments back. I'm not saying that talking about the Civil War is bad. But here in this forum, it's just not worth putting too much time in it.

"I find the whole affair depressing. There are no heroes in this war. No winners to be had and no real conclusion. If you want something a bard can dig into look to the dragons. A thousand years from now Skyrim will have changed rulers dozens of times but the return of the dragons, that story is once in an era." --An Altmer with the unhealthy habit of sleeping with lit torches

Well, I kindly disagree. Even if people ignore my arguments, that only goes to show its because they can't counter it. So people viewing will pick up on that, and hopefully will be swayed. I find it fun regardless, so its no more pointless than arguing if destruction is "broken" or not.

Actually I read those. I just don't find them as 'definitive' as you do because I am not coming from a perspective of looking for 'proof' that supports a particular thing. The developers put in 'evidence' to support every point of view, so a lot of that 'evidence' is going to be contradictory. I wasn't trying to discredit your point of view, just pointing out that your point of view is no better or worse than anyone elses point of view...despite your 'evidence'. If you did actually find some sort of absolute irrefutable support for your position all that would prove is that the developers failed.

I wasn't speaking about you, really. As for the developers failing, if their goal was to make both sides seem completely the same, then I think they did. What they did do was add the same amount of surface negatives for both. Legion got the chopping block for you and Roggvir, Stormcloaks get stuck with the racist trope because of the homeless guys in the front of Windhelm.

As for the rest, I can't speak for every point, as I don't have an absolute argument for everything, or even most things, but certain things like the Bear of Markarth claim of Ulfric I would dare say have been proven false. The blog I linked earlier that Celan showed a while ago shows it well.

http://colonelkillabee.tumblr.com/post/69194871525/stormcloak-bible-part-4-is-ulfric-a-power-hungry-dike