3 ms·
Going on a rant implying that there is somehow a grand conspiracy at foot while also attacking the user personally is not doing you any particular favors, consi
by fzeroracer 9y ago
Going on a rant implying that there is somehow a grand conspiracy at foot while also attacking the user personally is not doing you any particular favors, considering you're doing exactly the same thing you're purporting he's doing.
- Tech-Noir 9y agoWhen making up what I wrote, are you hoping nobody bothers to read what I wrote, or what? Quote me ranting about a "grand conspiracy". Quote me "attacking the user personally". > considering you're doing exactly the same thing you're purporting he's doing. What is it you imagine you're doing with this post, exactly?
- fzeroracer 9y ago>As in the last time you hijacked a thread as an excuse to complain about other people expressing an opinion you personally disagree with, you haven't discussed, or shown any interest in discussing, a single issue in the article. >You flag people left right and center, simply because they don't happen share your personal views. These are personal attacks. >Remarkable that in both threads two other usernames specifically namecheck you, "IntronExon", the 40 day old account (with ~3000 karma, that posts like a veteran). This is an allusion to conspiracy.
- Tech-Noir 9y ago> These are personal attacks. No, they're statements about behavior, and no more "personal attacks" than you falsely accusing me of making personal attacks, or of falsely accusing me of "ranting" about a "grand conspiracy at foot". > This is an allusion to conspiracy. So it's no longer a "grand conspiracy", just a mere "allusion to conspiracy"? What's the "conspiracy" you claim I'm alluding to then?