Clearly she has ascended.
2 Likes
It’s freaky.
1 Like
No u! 
2 Likes
An ascended gnome…. that is very scary!
1 Like
All hail the fire God! PIPPY!
3 Likes
Everything changed when the fire gnome attacked…
3 Likes
That joke was a logical choice.
3 Likes
Oh noes… Distant… you can use the air element right?
Air makes fire bigger!
1 Like
Water then?
wait no… hol’ up!
strikes Pippy at midnight with a water bucket That should solve it.
Nooooo…!!! I-I-I’m melting…!
Next time on ‘Top Ten Anime Betrayals’, Pippy goes for a swim… OF REVENGE
2 Likes
Your question was why I twisted your posts, no? I did answer you Zagkush.
I’m not sure what I should make of this question. It screams “why aren’t you acting like I would like you to act?”
What’s your point here, that you don’t like how I formulate my posts?
I already said I usually don’t twist the meaning of the posts and if it happens, it’s because the context isn’t calling for a rational argument, and that is always made explicit. In the discussion you linked, you made it explicit yourself when you said you were going to take what I write only as trolling, making it impossible to argue rationally. Consider what Tyreis just said:
While it might not be my job to “keep other people in place”, I still believe there is some dignity in taking care of my own points of view and defending them, aswell as making a case for them as I see fitting.
Not at all. They are 100% true: you exagerate things during the discussion and try to bend them as much as you can to suit your point of view. Weinstein’s case is a clear example: you claim there is video evidence (but no videos are provided), you claim the email in itself is racist, but “only in the context” of these ghost proofs. Then keep trying to find common ground with me (it’s just our subjective opinions after all) while arguing that mine is still deranged (but I must be reading only extremist journals), while suggesting I am a cruel person. You just think through your emotions.
Consider that in the last three post, you did:
- posted a misinformed version of the event which you yourself had to edit
- claim I am a vile person because I disagree with you
- claim there is evidence for your claims (namely, a video) but fail to provide it
- claim that the e-mail is racist in the proper context, which would be for everyone to see if only they would see this video
= this is the treatment the PCU gets
1 Like
My Child, this is not the end for you, arise as the first Generation of Deaf knights
1 Like
So you bring PCU into this somehow?
Are you an absolute nanner?
4 Likes
What has this whole argument had to do with the PCU of all things? Are you just throwing them in for good measure or something?
3 Likes
He has an agenda against the PCU, so anyone who argues with him is automatically part of it.
3 Likes
It’s just her line of reasoning (“people mistreated the PCU because they formulate accusations claiming they have evidence without backing it up and that isn’t fair”).
It’s not addressing them. It just happens that it is ironic that she defends her friends from her same (bad) argument.
It was Vixi who mentioned them a few posts above. I am not addressing them, I am just wondering how she reconciliates that she defends them from the same form of argument she has now thrown against me (and the case in question).
1 Like