You know, I did have a one line pithy response about how stupid it is that you're getting pissed someone is providing links and sources to back up what they say, but I've actually decided to break this down piece by piece so that anyone coming along afterwards knows exactly what a fucking moron you are.
"What claims?"
The literal sentences he's typing? lol are you serious?
The OP post was about how Ye is controlled opposition to split up Trump support. The OP then engaged with u/Harambe who said: "Controlled opposition doesn't name the jew."u/TallestSkil then engaged off this response. The arguments in question stem from there. Is that easy enough for you to follow now, or do you require further spoon feeding?
"Spamming links like an asshole..."
Yes, we've already been over this and he's not doing that, you fucking moron. He's writing single line sentences, easy to digest, easy to read, and inlays links into those sentences to support what the sentences say. For some reason, you can't understand this.
"Imagine thinking that copy pasta links was an argument. He had it ready to go."
Repeating the same answer to the same set of stupid questions doesn't make it a copy pasta or spamming. Imagine thinking sourced claims are a copy pasta lmao.
"He has literally ignored every single thing OP said. Didn't engage with a single thing."
Except he has and you just won't read what he's saying because you're a fucking moron who thinks he's a hell of a lot smarter than he actually is. Again, we've been over this.
If you actually read the sentences and clicked on the links, you would understand his claims and wouldn't be whining at me to spoon feed them to you. "wHaT cLaiMs?"
"That's not an argument."
Except it is and you're just too stupid to understand it, hence this long winded post of mine going step by step for you. In a court or debate, you don't just make claims, fuck off and expect a win. You must provide evidence to support said claims. This ties into the metric of precedence: showcasing that the argument/claim has been made before and for what reasons.
"That's not discussion."
It's not on your level of discussion, clearly. Don't ever try to professionally debate anything.
"That's called spamming."
Yes, your honor. I'd like to provide ZERO evidence and ZERO support for my claims. I wouldn't want obstruction to be called on the account of spamming. Is my client free to go?
Now re-read that sentence again. In what world, other than the fantasy inside your head, does that sentence make any sense? This loops us back around to the start of my post where I point out you're getting pissed that he's providing links to back up what he says. Why? Does it challenge the fantasy inside your head? lol
"You're just blinded by your own bias."
lmfao if that's not the pot calling the kettle black. I'm not the one refusing to read evidence and claiming "I win. I'm superior." because of it, like a toddler.
"Now you're engaging in the sliding as well. You're probably his alt."
Oh yes, I forgot. If I don't agree with you, I'm sliding and his alt.
Get some fucking help, take your meds and get off the internet. Or, just take your zero sum musings back to reddit where dunning krugers get all the ego stroking they can handle.
The last word is yours. You're either pretending to be stupid on purpose (not a good angle to give your argument traction), really are that stupid, or just high echelon trolling, any reason of which doesn't require any further response from me.
Yes, we've already been over this and he's not doing that, you fucking moron. He's writing single line sentences, easy to digest, easy to read, and inlays links into those sentences to support what the sentences say. For some reason, you can't understand this.
I find that one of the most demoralizing things in my day to day is that my copypastas always devolve into this formula. I have to write as though I’m in first grade again. Extremely simple sentences. Direct links on the “correct” words of the sentences. And when I have a question, I have to put the question word itself in bold, because I’ve been told “you didn’t ask any questions” before. It would be astonishing if I didn’t know that this dumbing down has been on purpose, so instead it’s just horrifically depressing.
You know, I did have a one line pithy response about how stupid it is that you're getting pissed someone is providing links and sources to back up what they say, but I've actually decided to break this down piece by piece so that anyone coming along afterwards knows exactly what a fucking moron you are.
"What claims?"
The literal sentences he's typing? lol are you serious?
The OP post was about how Ye is controlled opposition to split up Trump support. The OP then engaged with u/Harambe who said: "Controlled opposition doesn't name the jew." u/TallestSkil then engaged off this response. The arguments in question stem from there. Is that easy enough for you to follow now, or do you require further spoon feeding?
"Spamming links like an asshole..."
Yes, we've already been over this and he's not doing that, you fucking moron. He's writing single line sentences, easy to digest, easy to read, and inlays links into those sentences to support what the sentences say. For some reason, you can't understand this.
"Imagine thinking that copy pasta links was an argument. He had it ready to go."
Repeating the same answer to the same set of stupid questions doesn't make it a copy pasta or spamming. Imagine thinking sourced claims are a copy pasta lmao.
"He has literally ignored every single thing OP said. Didn't engage with a single thing."
Except he has and you just won't read what he's saying because you're a fucking moron who thinks he's a hell of a lot smarter than he actually is. Again, we've been over this.
If you actually read the sentences and clicked on the links, you would understand his claims and wouldn't be whining at me to spoon feed them to you. "wHaT cLaiMs?"
"That's not an argument."
Except it is and you're just too stupid to understand it, hence this long winded post of mine going step by step for you. In a court or debate, you don't just make claims, fuck off and expect a win. You must provide evidence to support said claims. This ties into the metric of precedence: showcasing that the argument/claim has been made before and for what reasons.
"That's not discussion."
It's not on your level of discussion, clearly. Don't ever try to professionally debate anything.
"That's called spamming."
Yes, your honor. I'd like to provide ZERO evidence and ZERO support for my claims. I wouldn't want obstruction to be called on the account of spamming. Is my client free to go?
Now re-read that sentence again. In what world, other than the fantasy inside your head, does that sentence make any sense? This loops us back around to the start of my post where I point out you're getting pissed that he's providing links to back up what he says. Why? Does it challenge the fantasy inside your head? lol
"You're just blinded by your own bias."
lmfao if that's not the pot calling the kettle black. I'm not the one refusing to read evidence and claiming "I win. I'm superior." because of it, like a toddler.
"Now you're engaging in the sliding as well. You're probably his alt."
Oh yes, I forgot. If I don't agree with you, I'm sliding and his alt.
Get some fucking help, take your meds and get off the internet. Or, just take your zero sum musings back to reddit where dunning krugers get all the ego stroking they can handle.
The last word is yours. You're either pretending to be stupid on purpose (not a good angle to give your argument traction), really are that stupid, or just high echelon trolling, any reason of which doesn't require any further response from me.
Thanks for the time kill.
I find that one of the most demoralizing things in my day to day is that my copypastas always devolve into this formula. I have to write as though I’m in first grade again. Extremely simple sentences. Direct links on the “correct” words of the sentences. And when I have a question, I have to put the question word itself in bold, because I’ve been told “you didn’t ask any questions” before. It would be astonishing if I didn’t know that this dumbing down has been on purpose, so instead it’s just horrifically depressing.
You have still yet to engage with anything OP specifically said...?
This really isn't complicated.
You just said absolutely nothing of substance.
Still waiting for you to discuss OP's points, which were about specific things Trump DID.
Versus things he said with widly biased subtext that doesn't address a single point OP made.
Spamming links doesn't constitute engagement.