Divide and conquer.
So many people here are ready to fight at the slightest dissent. So ready to censor and ban.
It’s unnatural.
Divide and conquer.
So many people here are ready to fight at the slightest dissent. So ready to censor and ban.
It’s unnatural.
Do you have a citation for that? Because I think my replies have been pretty chill.
This isn’t a theses defense, so stop with the sophistry.
Well he called me a dick.
Exactly this. I never said such a thing.
That depends. Are you just going to argue and defend whatever I find, or are you going to read them and consider that maybe they aren’t as chill as you think?
I’m willing to help you learn and understand, but I’m not interested in wasting my time on an argument.
I promise to read and consider!
So, this is a rather unflattering conversation. I’m going to translate each post HOW I INTERPRET IT. I have no doubt that whatever you originally intended will not match what I describe. That’s the point. I don’t think you’re a bad person, I think you’re not communicating effectively and sometimes it makes you sound like an asshole.
Title: Cause and Effect isn’t real! (Take note that there is no supporting text to explain the ambiguous title.)
Them: I don’t understand what you mean. Can you give an example?
You: Title rephrased in an even MORE ambiguous way. It’s pointless to explain because you’re all morons in an echo chamber.
Them: We just wanted clarification.
You: I know YOU are, but what am I ?
Them: Wait, what? You started this conversation, you should tell us what led you to believe this.
You: ugh you’re so difficult! Do you want proof or clarification?
Them: Nevermind, I found your other comment where you explained yourself better.
Well you certainly put a lot of work into that. For that reason I will consider it.
I honestly have no idea if you’re completely dismissing me or not.