There is a total lack of acknowledgement of any thought other than that which the angry mob insists

a reply to: User1138

Makes no difference. I wasn't the one complaining about it.

I was just pointing out that you complained about it and then went ahead and did it as well.

I don't see why that seems difficult for you to grasp.

a reply to: daskakik

lol thanks for talking for half a page about nothing

a reply to: User1138

It isn't nothing, it shows how "the level of condescension on these boards and elsewhere is why you lose and continue to lose." is just lip service.

a reply to: daskakik

My point in bringing up Parroted talking points is that many people substitute them for abstract analysis, and thought. I am thinking critically about topics. I am bringing up things issue by issue and discussing them in different ways. Notice how you don't bring up a single issue?

originally posted by: User1138
My point in bringing up Parroted talking points is that many people substitute them for abstract analysis, and thought. I am thinking critically about topics. I am bringing up issue by issue and discussing them in different ways.

Not really, you posted a few memes and a few parroted points. How much critical thinking does that take?

Notice how you don't bring up a single issue?

So?

a reply to: daskakik

quit redirecting and talk about something human. Are you a robot? As I stated you cannot bring up a single issue you do not consider a "parroted talking point" by your made up standards

This is you:

a reply to: User1138

You made a specific point and I refuted it. How is that redirecting?

Your points are local (NYC misgendering law) or hyped. I can't find the jail for asking a phone number thing, although honestly, I didn't look very hard.

ETA:

This is you:

I have not asked you to prove anything so, no.

a reply to: daskakik

So you don't know what i'm talking about, but i'm also just parroting talking points. Which is it? It can't be both.

a reply to: User1138

When you first asked I wasn't sure what points you were talking about. You then posted some stuff about phone numbers, misgendering and some other stuff. I figured that was what you meant by points.

Guess it is both at different points in time.

a reply to: daskakik

Maybe if you had read my thread you'd understand where I am coming from. Instead you just read a few lines and thought to call me out on some random perceived hypocrisy. This is the angry mob, kill it with fire, mentality I was talking about in my OP.

a reply to: User1138

I did read the thread. The OP makes no sense and doesn't really say who the angry mob even is. I think the second post in the thread makes that pretty clear.

I'm one person. Impossible for me to be an angry mob.

If anything you have shown to be more easily angered than anyone taking part in your thread.

Taking an OP to task for the claims he makes is the SOP around here.

a reply to: daskakik

I'm sorry then If you don't understand my talking points, but to call them "parroted" when you don't know what i'm talking about seems pretty closed minded. If you expect me to explain my points to you right now one by one i'd rather not.

originally posted by: User1138
I'm sorry then If you don't understand my talking points, but to call them "parroted" when you don't know what i'm talking about seems pretty closed minded. If you expect me to explain my points to you right now one by one i'd rather not.

You didn't post any of the "talking points" in the OP so when I say the OP makes no sense it doesn't mean that I don't know what the "talking points" that you brought up later are.

Were you jailed for asking a girl for her number? Is that even real? If it wasn't you or someone you know then it was something you heard and are parroting here. I can't find any case with that description.

originally posted by: daskakik

Were you jailed for asking a girl for her number? Is that even real? If it wasn't you or someone you know then it was something you heard and are parroting here. I can't find any case with that description.

So if it didn't happen to me, or someone I know... it was never a law on the books, it never happened, anywhere, ever? By this logic man never walked on the moon because I never met an astronaut.

www.nationalreview.com...

originally posted by: User1138
So if it didn't happen to me, or someone I know... it was never a law on the books, it never happened, anywhere, ever?

No, that is not what I said. I said you are re-telling (parroting) something that might have or might not have happened.

The UK isn't exactly the US and catcalling isn't asking for a phone number.

I guess the answer is no, you didn't witness it first hand and are here parroting.

a reply to: daskakik

I never witnessed the sinking of the Titanic did that happen?

a reply to: User1138

I never said you seeing it was a requirement for something to have happened. It is a requirement for you to say that you are not parroting.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: User1138
So if it didn't happen to me, or someone I know... it was never a law on the books, it never happened, anywhere, ever?

I guess the answer is no, you didn't witness it first hand and are here parroting.

a reply to: User1138

Exactly what I said. You are parroting something you have not witnessed first hand.

The article also doesn't say that you can go to jail for asking a girl for her number so that is still unsubstantiated although I'm sure that was also something you just parroted as well.

I don't know if you guys should take it outside or get a room.