3 ms·
> It's absurd that you ignored half the comment you were responding to. Whatever point you might have had, you burned all your credibility when you decided to m
by d23 3y ago
> It's absurd that you ignored half the comment you were responding to. Whatever point you might have had, you burned all your credibility when you decided to make a dishonest argument by taking someone else's words out of context.
As I said before, the context is readily available. I have also responded to the totality of the original message. And in doing so, I also quoted you. Leading to this:
> This isn't a team sport: just because I'm pointing out that you're wrong, doesn't mean I'm agreeing with the other guy.
Do you want me to address the person (and your!) claims or not?
You just spent three paragraphs repeatedly calling me an unrepentant, untrustworthy liar with no credibility and no capacity for nuance.
- kerkeslager 3y ago> As I said before, the context is readily available. ...which is why it's obvious that the following is not true: > I have also responded to the totality of the original message. Anyway... > Do you want me to address the person (and your!) claims or not? 1. Yes, I would like you to address the person's claims. 2. Now you're telling me what my claims are? Cooooool. > You just spent three paragraphs repeatedly calling me an unrepentant, untrustworthy liar with no credibility and no capacity for nuance. I didn't say you had no capacity for nuance. ;) I'm sure you could participate in a nuanced discussion if you chose to, it's just clear you're making other choices.