Now, mind you, I don't necessarily agree with your stance here. Just saying arguing with asdf is a waste of time.Fair enough.
Let me know which one of my posts you and asdf are having the most trouble with and we can revisit it.So that's a no, you'd rather have the attention and the pissfest.
Just saying arguing with asdf is a waste of time.
ASDF is not a genuine poster and will never concede on any point even when he's directly wrong. We had a disagreement in another thread, where I called him out that his opinion does not trump a venue's dress code. He told me, mine doesn't either, and I quoted myself and outlined where I stated repeatedly, that he'd be right if the woman in question violated a venue's dress code and that isn't what happened. I showed, and outlined, that I never posted my thoughts over a venue's right to enforce their own dress codes.Glad, you arent one to concede yourself, and I didnt "run away" from the conversation.
I then asked him, as a measure of good faith, and if he is posting in good faith, if he could concede that I never made such a claim and he was wrong in saying that. Guess what Asdf did? He ran away. Tucked tail and booked it out of the conversation completely.
Now, mind you, I don't necessarily agree with your stance here. Just saying arguing with asdf is a waste of time.
I added that I'm not saying I think you're wrong. I'm just going to need some proof. The whole situation is pretty damning and I agree it's one hell of a coincidence but I can't believe that the democrat party colluded and got together to find 7 safe candidates to vote against themselves. It could have happened, but I just need direct proof. So yeah lolI don't think we're ever going to have direct proof, barring someone just being honest in an interview or a memoir - but it's too many coincidences occurring at once for me to just ignore the possibility. Since Trump's 2nd term there's always just something that goes wrong with a Dem that leads to Trump getting whatever he wants.
So that's a no, you'd rather have the attention and the pissfest.I know you can't see it but I'm rolling my eyes and sighing super hard now.
You might notice that was my first post here, I have no investment, just thought you'd be interested in not fucking around for attention.
It was already pretty obvious, but the clarification is nice.
Toodles, have fun still doing this in six hours.
I don't think we're ever going to have direct proof, barring someone just being honest in an interview or a memoir - but it's too many coincidences occurring at once for me to just ignore the possibility. Since Trump's 2nd term there's always just something that goes wrong with a Dem that leads to Trump getting whatever he wants.
No. You did. I gave you the opportunity and I have the screenshots to back it up. I literally quoted myself to directly show you I never felt my opinion superseded any venue and asked you to concede that I did not make that claim. You stopped posting."Giving me the opportunity to concede" isnt the point you think you are making in showing you concede. I stopped posting because its not worth the time. It was clear we didnt agree at all, we were never going to agree, none of us were budging, and I had something more interesting to do.
So you're conceding here your job isn't to convince anyone of anything. Got it. As I said, responding to you is a waste of time.By that same token you are a waste of time given you dont concede yourself.
If you say so. I'm just going to remind people you aren't a genuine poster and many came around to that conclusion before I did.Enjoy your petty vendetta.
How on earth do shitty enablers/accessories (some Ds) get full responsibility vs. the fucking perps (all Rs)?Its kind of the same logic behind why owners get blamed for dog attacks.
I know you can't see it but I'm rolling my eyes and sighing super hard now.He said.
Like y'all super serious posters do know that you don't actually look good ITT, do you? All the pointless insults and drive by shit posts don't actually make you look like the good guys here. Holy moley people, can we act like the adults that were all supposed to be here?
He said.Yay, more pointless insults.
With zero irony.
In the fourth hour of his pointless pissfest.
Not worth your time to address a lie you made about the person you are arguing? How convenient.That you hardly concede debates yourself with people you hardly agree with.
I'm not looking to win. I even admitted, in many instances, you were even correct.Ill take bs for 500 Alex. Even now you are holding onto a petty grudge because you thought you were owed a concession on something we did not agree on.
Strange. I had posters literally tell me "Woah. I'm surprised you admitted you were wrong there. Many people don't do that."Ill take bs for 500 Alex.
Not much of one. Again, if I see people waste their time with you I'm just going to remind them that it isn't worth it. Not much of a vendetta. More of a psa. There's no feud.And yet, your grudge is on full display. Even now by your own words its not worth replying to me.... but here you are... still responding.
Its kind of the same logic behind why owners get blamed for dog attacks.
The Republicans cant act on behalf of the people. Its just not in their nature. The democrats are supposed to be the ones to keep them on a leash however they can, and here they just refused to for seemingly no reason at all (ie. they were paid to).
First it was I don't. Now I hardly do. Those goalposts.I said you only concede to people you already agree with. You do not concede to anyone you typically disagree with.
You didn't agree you lied about something I said when I provided 5 of my quotes that ran contrary to your claim about me? Again, I literally have the screenshots. I also said words like "In many instances you are right. You are correct, just not here. Yes, people do this but this isn't the case." That seems to be strong language that I am conceding that you are right in multiple instances.That isnt conceding as we did not agree on the fundamental conversation itself. Making declarations to something that's contrary to my actual argument isnt a concession just because it makes you feel better to feel like its one.
My reputation here speaks for itself.To those who typically agree with you, ya, I kind of already said that.
Sure.So you do have a grudge then. So its finally coming out?
Are you not engaging in a last word contest, right now?Your grudge interests me because you are the one who decided to bring up your grudge. You brought up your grudge from some other topic from over a week ago, not me.
Or.. is a conversation interesting only in so-far you aren't caught outright lying?
He said.He got his feelings hurt because hes a snowflake. Those types are always like that. Cant dare insult the fascist supporters or they start crying.
With zero irony.
In the fourth hour of his pointless pissfest.
Untrue. I had someone correct me with a more recent study that superseded my old study I was using that was conducted back in the 1990's. I was unaware that both a new study was conducted in 2024 and that study contradicted the previous findings. I didn't like the answer but I conceded I was, indeed, wrong.You arent helping disprove what I just said of doing so with users you typically already agree with. At best this is a nice story.
You told me outright that my opinion doesn't supersede a venue's either and that I too was putting my own beliefs over a venue's right to their own dress code.Speaking of misconstrueding my posts. My argument was about not all feminists agree that dressing raunchy is empowerment, and that my post are NOT aboit that venue. You decided to repeatedly keep circling back to the venue to make my posts about the venue, and worse decided twist my post to be all about the venues decision. Using the above to desperately spin all my posts to be about the venue.
I did not. Again, I have the screenshotsPeople with petty grudges tend to, so that doesnt surprise me.
also conceded that I am slightly hypocritical of not heeding my own advice, by the way, which does run counter to your claim I won't concede a point.I dont even know how to address the hot mess earlier in your post. But to this in particular..... you conveniently conceding (debateble at that) in the very topic of someone saying you dont concede to people who you typically disagree with, doesnt remotely prove you are a beacon example of someone who concedes to those you typically disagree with.
He got his feelings hurt because hes a snowflake. Those types are always like that. Cant dare insult the fascist supporters or they start crying.Is it really that hard for you to stop talking about my ass? Hey Sundercles, no means no. Stop means stop.
Is it really that hard for you to stop talking about my ass?Where did I mention your ass there?
Hey Sundercles, no means no. Stop means stop.Youre the one sticking up for the pro rapist, pro pedo party there, buddy. Shoulda told old Trumpedo that instead.
Youre the one sticking up for the pro rapist, pro pedo party there, buddy. Shoulda told old Trumpedo that instead.Where, in the post where I compared them to a monkey with the gun or the one where I compared them to bank robbers? You read those insults to Republicans and interpret that as me sticking up for them?
Where, in the post where I compared them to a monkey with the gun or the one where I compared them to bank robbers? You read those insults to Republicans and interpret that as me sticking up for them?This topic is over 130 posts of mostly rants. Forgive me if I missed or glossed over a post or two. I interpret you finding no problem with the Orphan Crushing Machine to be sticking up for them.
Sundercles do you even know how to read?I see. Your fee-fees cant handle insults but you have no problem relying on them yourself.
he fact that you admit there are "certain posters" I will admit are right, over me, is not giving you the fuel that you thinkIts not giving you fuel either. We both can claim to concede against specific users you agree with that you deem were in good faith.
said you were off topic multiple times as well since this WAS about that venue and this specific instance in question.Ironic you talk of goalpost moving. You chose to respond to me speaking specifically about not all feminists dont view raunchy as empowering. I made it clear from the jump of my original post that was what my post was about. As my post WASN'T about the venue or Sweeney dress and I made that crystal clear. Yet, you kept trying to circle my post to that instead of what I was saying. Then demanding a concession to something my post was never about with you insisting it was
In fact, I'll say right now, I agree with more of your posts than I don't.Despite when we disagree, I can say I agree with more of your posts than I dont as well.
This topic is over 130 posts of mostly rants. Forgive me if I missed or glossed over a post or two. I interpret you finding no problem with the Orphan Crushing Machine to be sticking up for them.You mean the posts where I also yielded to the analogy of them owning an orphan crushing machine? Gee 130 posts, how many did you actually read before deciding you couldn't be bothered with it anymore, cause that was one of our first ones. Illiterate and obsessed with my ass. Gee Sunder way to show me. I'm reeling over here from that powerful 1-2 combo of yours.
You mean the posts where I also yielded to the analogy of them owning an orphan crushing machine? Gee 130 posts, how many did you actually read before deciding you couldn't be bothered with it anymore, cause that was one of our first ones. Illiterate and obsessed with my ass. Gee Sunder way to show me. I'm reeling over here from that powerful 1-2 combo of yours.Nice how you didnt defend your hypocrisy and then kept insulting, furthering your hypocrisy. Or could you not finish reading the post you replied to. Are you perhaps the illiterate one?
Nice how you didnt defend your hypocrisy and then kept insulting, furthering your hypocrisy. Or could you not finish reading the post you replied to. Are you perhaps the illiterate one?You called me a fascist supporter based on absolutely nothing. I called you illiterate based on you admitting you don't read. I also saw post 100 before you deleted it too, where you misinterpreted Gladius post.
Hour six.You were right calling him out on being attention seeking and having a pissfest for hours. Which apparently isnt an insult since its true.
Hour six.I'm in other topics too.
Which apparently isnt an insult since its true.So we're in agreement you struggle with reading.
Im done responding to him. Shoulda stuck to my guns earlier.Bye bye. It's literally what I've been asking you to do all topic long.
That is not at all what I was asking the concession for and you know it. It was literally this exchange:You were asking for a concession on something my post made crystal clear from the jump my post is not about. Something that I actually repeated over and over it wasnt about.
You could have admitted, that I never made such a claimWhich brings us to the heart of the problem with your claim. My original post, and discussion literally was never about the venue or Sweeneys dress. You decided to ignore multiple posts stating just that to say at some point:
If you say so. Just know if I catch you bailing when statistics or evidence is brought up that counters your claim, you continue to argue the point when the evidence refutes you, or if someone corners you on something they didn't say and directly show evidence they didn't say it, I will begin to stack up these occurrences and create a list.Creating "lists" and keeping tallies, and banking screenshots of a user on the internet is pretty spot on for a petty grudge. So I wouldnt expect less.
In these days, not being able to manage situations without giving the impression of failure and capitulation is pretty disastrous. Like it or not, vibes matter.Good post, what I was going to come back to say but said more eloquently.
Republicans are the ones responsible for terrible policies that cause untold suffering. The Democrats should never be the ones who 'look bad'. Yet here we are. And, no, it isn't only 'secret Trump supporters' who think this reflects poorly on the party as a whole.
By the fucked up logic of some in this topic (and the topic title), Neville Chamberlain was to blame for everyone the Nazis killed in WWII and the Holocaust.Neville Chamberlain didn't have 100 years of history to look at to show him the folly of appeasement. What's Tim Kaine's excuse?
After all, as some would have to tell the tale to be consistent, Hitler and the Nazis were animals with no agency, so their (nonexistent) minders were really responsible.
To hell with that shit.