SILICON VALLEY— A panel of experts, including AI engineers, behavioral scientists, and child healthcare specialists, gathered today to discuss whether the Redditor you’re actively arguing…
Sounds overzealous to me. Wrapped up in that is the assumption that associating a person with Putin is said as just a way to hurt feelings, rather than a perhaps-assuming claim… before yesterday, it never once occurred to me that a mod would have an issue with a claim of association that cannot be proven either way. Might as well start banning people for telling each other they’re wrong.
Wrapped up in that is the assumption that associating a person with Putin is said as just a way to hurt feelings, rather than a perhaps-assuming claim… before yesterday, it never once occurred to me that a mod would have an issue with a claim of association that cannot be proven either way. Might as well start banning people for telling each other they’re wrong.
So, if I were to hit you with a claim of association that cannot be proven either way, but just so happens to conveniently dismiss anything you said, and anything you might say in response, you wouldn’t consider that a personal attack?
Fine by me: How much is Putin paying you to sow bad-faith arguments among non-republicans?
I am frequently hit with much worse “attacks” than this and I laugh at and ignore the vast majority of them. Even when someone’s particularly good at being personally insulting (this example is NOT) I rarely get hurt by it.
Ah, so you do, in fact, recognize it as an attack, a personally insulting one, with the intention “to hurt feelings”, and not a “perhaps-assuming claim” you present it when trying to justify not getting banned for being an asshole.
recognize it as an attack, a personally insulting one, with the intention “to hurt feelings”,
Precisely what I strongly dispute. It’s only an insult if you have no idea what an actual insult is.
trying to justify not getting banned for being an asshole.
Kinda ironic that you did not even read the conversation, and you get to call me an asshole in the same breath as telling me I was insulting, which again since you didn’t read the conversation you’re pulling that assumption straight from your rectum anyhow.
Sounds overzealous to me. Wrapped up in that is the assumption that associating a person with Putin is said as just a way to hurt feelings, rather than a perhaps-assuming claim… before yesterday, it never once occurred to me that a mod would have an issue with a claim of association that cannot be proven either way. Might as well start banning people for telling each other they’re wrong.
So, if I were to hit you with a claim of association that cannot be proven either way, but just so happens to conveniently dismiss anything you said, and anything you might say in response, you wouldn’t consider that a personal attack?
Fine by me: How much is Putin paying you to sow bad-faith arguments among non-republicans?
I am frequently hit with much worse “attacks” than this and I laugh at and ignore the vast majority of them. Even when someone’s particularly good at being personally insulting (this example is NOT) I rarely get hurt by it.
Ah, so you do, in fact, recognize it as an attack, a personally insulting one, with the intention “to hurt feelings”, and not a “perhaps-assuming claim” you present it when trying to justify not getting banned for being an asshole.
Precisely what I strongly dispute. It’s only an insult if you have no idea what an actual insult is.
Kinda ironic that you did not even read the conversation, and you get to call me an asshole in the same breath as telling me I was insulting, which again since you didn’t read the conversation you’re pulling that assumption straight from your rectum anyhow.
This is only an argument if you have no idea what an actual argument is.
I’m not arguing with you. Bye.
You’re right, you’re not.