i wasn't going to reply back (as mentioned in my previous response) assuming that you would answer my questions and leave me with no questions to ask. however, that's not the case.
first of: thanks for answering my questions indirectly (once again). what do i mean by indirectly?
you indirectly agreed that you dislike teh way the director portrays saloni's character. that's funny since in my previous questions i had left that as an option as to whether you do feel saloni'scharacter was in fact portrayed as a unrealistic (poor) character.
all you had to say was yes (or agreed) to my previous questions.
seondly, thanks for again confirming what you had already said to me about giving characters (or people i should say) teh benefit of doubt.which is the case for urvashi.
thirdly, you again (indirectly) gave me teh same answer as teh first question as to why tara's "can't get pregnant situation" was side-tracked because of the director. meaning that pretty much this was another aspect of the direction in which you didn't like, chosen by saat phere's director.
that's cool.
next time just answer (if you want to) when the actual question is presented to you.
now, why am i confused about something and why do i have another question to ask you has to do with you saying that you like saloni's character (keep in mind you said character not the person). by saying that you've also implied that by saying that you are giving teh director some credit here.
now my actual question (and the real reason why i'm replying again) is you said in a earlier reply (to me) that "so you agreed that saloni is stupid".
i find that odd since on one hand you said that you like saloni's character and on teh other hand you think she is stupid for what she is doing.
that sounds like a contradiction to me. you'll probably reply back and say that you meant it differently (and that i was wrong)
all i could advise is give straight answers to your replies (when tehactual questions are presented to you) instead of leaving some confusion.
Tripler