Anyone who is worth interacting with knows that your perspective is abominable and irredeemable. I don't need to answer any of your worthless questions.
I was once asked in an argument on this subject when joel was being dogpiled again if I condoned what joel is accused of condoning here. I explained how interpreted the historical cases and how the logic behind killing said kids would apply differently today and how other avenues could be utilized for the sake of maintaining security while not killing the kids. The user who asked me refused to address or even acknowledge anything that I said. I had to hound him repeatedly and after demanding a response four or five times, he finally caved, but only replied "I only wanted a yes or no answer so I wouldn't have replied to anything that wasn't just yes or no." That is the bullshittiest and most transparent copout imaginable. This response from you reminds me of that incident.
That is not how that went down...at all. I even explained to you my reasoning but you were to lo focused on your own points to even consider mine.
Yea Ive seen him like that before as well. Just the other day I explained myself to him about my opinion on Trump because he accused me of never criticizing him. I even also kindly explained my opinion to him for being harder on Acosta for the fiasco the other day because that what the topic was about it. All he basically had to say was a condescending try again. Theres really no pleasing some folk here even if youre trying to be nice and explain your view, best to just avoid them.
Oh, he admits that he purposefully uses ad hominem attacks in his argument so people can call him out on it. I guess it's his way of thinking he "wins" because people don't want to engage with someone so hostile and therefore stop replying.
He's like Unfair but not a gimmick.
I also know for a fact he has at least 2 alts here, sometimes I see them posting together in the same topic lmfao ---
I don't know my gimmick "Does that sound reasonable to you?"