TiggerYumYum

joined 2 weeks ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

It's Drake. A pop star and known pedophile.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (4 children)

You have no idea what's going on. We aren't in ruins. There aren't traces. We are a civilization. And that person worded it poorly, they should've said tolerance.

Not really. We are all pretty connected in our communities. We just have a bad government.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Hey! Stop posting this pedophile. Maybe Reddit is more your speed.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (6 children)

What? This is nonsensical. I'm not alienated from my neighbors and community. A lot of us aren't. Obviously the US is and has a civilization. You're trying to redefine civilization and it is really not working. This is odd.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I randomly came across you and saw the tag I left you. Lol

"No you" really? Are you a child?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

Lord have mercy.

User A stated that property damage is not violence.

User B expanded on that topic (not a derailment because it is relevant. A derailment would be them talking about another topic, example: music) and challenged the scope of different definitions of violence. You ignored this.

When you asked User B if they agree that property damage is violence, they stated their position that yes, it can be.

There are TWO different people, with TWO different opinions, and you are mixing them up.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Really? I came across you again. Still acting in bad faith, huh? The founder Eric likes his Pebble watches, and wants to make it again. What is with you and your lack of understanding? How hard is that to believe?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

See? Still bad faith.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The other user elaborated to you on the importance of context. They challenged the definitions of violence. You basically responded "I was right" with very simple ideas. They didn't admit anything later, because their position remained the same throughout. You saying otherwise is the bad faith part. It is okay if you don't understand the complexities, but it is bad faith to misrepresent that other user.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

See? Bad faith.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Based on your bad faith acting. Ya know, the whole conversation up above.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago

The initial claim was made by a different user. The user you're talking about elaborated on the importance of context, so they didn't contradict themselves.

With reading comprehension like that...

view more: ‹ prev next ›