4 ms·

That's a much bigger assumption than assuming someone talking about contemporary news follows it.

nomel 4y ago
I'd say it's a repeated observation of something incredibly consistent, whenever these discussions (and others) come up, more than a blind assumption. My prediction of your response, and you precisely following that prediction, being evidence that both of us have done this before. Maybe that pattern is intentional, or maybe it's emergent. I'll also claim to know the next part of the pattern, but I don't think you can complete the pattern, somewhere like this, and it definitely involves misplaced assumptions.
- freejazz 4y ago
  Often here people mistake plausibility for reasonability, I'm not surprised to see it occur here as well. You aren't being reasonable. None of your post is reasonable. You are relying upon plausible deniability to make your point, but it's entirely counter to the purpose of conversing here where we are supposed to try to make an effort to understand each other. I will repeat my point that when discussing a particular element of the news, it is reasonable to assume that someone partaking in the conversation is reasonably informed about that exact topic they are discussing. That assumption is eminently more reasonable than your assumption that it is a trap. It's actually laughable and speaks to your individual paranoia and unwillingness to discuss the topic in earnest.
  - nomel 4y ago
    Notice the extreme and complete change in your tone, and even phrasing! It's like your a completely different person. > we are supposed to try to make an effort to understand each other. My first comment was asking for clarification, so discussion could be had. You made no efforts, and resisted, until now. > I will repeat my point that when discussing a particular element of the news As my first comment stated, the problem is that no particular element was discussed. I suggest re-reading this thread. The rest of your post is a textbook example of gaslighting, so I'm choosing to remove myself from this thread now. But, I sincerely wish the best for you.
    - freejazz 4y ago
      >Notice the extreme and complete change in your tone, and even phrasing! It's like your a completely different person. No change in my tone nor my point. >My first comment was asking for clarification, so discussion could be had. You made no efforts, and resisted, until now. I literally offered an example that fit. >As my first comment stated, the problem is that no particular element was discussed. I suggest re-reading this thread. Yawn. >The rest of your post is a textbook example of gaslighting, so I'm choosing to remove myself from this thread now. But, I sincerely wish the best for you. Be gaslight, then. It's all projection from you anyway.

I'd say it's a repeated observation of something incredibly consistent, whenever these discussions (and others) come up, more than a blind assumption. My prediction of your response, and you precisely following that prediction, being evidence that both of us have done this before. Maybe that pattern is intentional, or maybe it's emergent. I'll also claim to know the next part of the pattern, but I don't think you can complete the pattern, somewhere like this, and it definitely involves misplaced assumptions.

freejazz 4y ago
Often here people mistake plausibility for reasonability, I'm not surprised to see it occur here as well. You aren't being reasonable. None of your post is reasonable. You are relying upon plausible deniability to make your point, but it's entirely counter to the purpose of conversing here where we are supposed to try to make an effort to understand each other. I will repeat my point that when discussing a particular element of the news, it is reasonable to assume that someone partaking in the conversation is reasonably informed about that exact topic they are discussing. That assumption is eminently more reasonable than your assumption that it is a trap. It's actually laughable and speaks to your individual paranoia and unwillingness to discuss the topic in earnest.
- nomel 4y ago
  Notice the extreme and complete change in your tone, and even phrasing! It's like your a completely different person. > we are supposed to try to make an effort to understand each other. My first comment was asking for clarification, so discussion could be had. You made no efforts, and resisted, until now. > I will repeat my point that when discussing a particular element of the news As my first comment stated, the problem is that no particular element was discussed. I suggest re-reading this thread. The rest of your post is a textbook example of gaslighting, so I'm choosing to remove myself from this thread now. But, I sincerely wish the best for you.
  - freejazz 4y ago
    >Notice the extreme and complete change in your tone, and even phrasing! It's like your a completely different person. No change in my tone nor my point. >My first comment was asking for clarification, so discussion could be had. You made no efforts, and resisted, until now. I literally offered an example that fit. >As my first comment stated, the problem is that no particular element was discussed. I suggest re-reading this thread. Yawn. >The rest of your post is a textbook example of gaslighting, so I'm choosing to remove myself from this thread now. But, I sincerely wish the best for you. Be gaslight, then. It's all projection from you anyway.