I get it now, the guy is having a meltdown for the following reason:
- We shat on his post, not agreeging that Oda's presentation of G5 was even decent let alone the greatest thing since sliced bread
- ILLogiko takes that as us disagreeing with the definitions of foreshadowing and shadowing, which he takes as fact (yet there are multiple different definitions for each term, but whatever)
- ILLogiko rants about how he can't be wrong because the techniques are objectively good (fallacy since the technique itself cannot be good or bad, only its application can be).
- ILLogiko then argues that, because the definitions of these literary techniques are correct, he is also correct, thinking that his analysis of the story must be impeccable
- Cue circular arguments where ILLogiko proves the irony of his username