全 70 件のコメント

[–]SnapshillBot 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Snapshots:

  1. This Post - 1, 2, 3

  2. Business insider, Trump pro gay - 1, 2, Error

  3. Trump stands with LGBT community - 1, 2, Error

I am a bot. (Info / Contact)

[–]Batty-KodaTIL mod 0ポイント1ポイント  (66子コメント)

I don't get how people like you just lie, straight out, even linking to your lie, and expect to get away with it. I also don't get how it works so often, but that's a discussion for another time.

This is the title of your post

The Latest: Trump: US stands with Orlando's LBGT community

This is the title of the article

The Latest: Trump yanks Washington Post credentials

How are those the same exact title? In what way are those the same?

How much are you even bothering to read the rules, considering you responded to the automod telling you NOT to use the "suggest a title" with "but I used suggest a title!"?


Edit: lol that you edited in an ad hominem attack, but you can't acknowledge YOUR OWN CLAIMS. 20 replies, and you can't confirm OR deny your own argument, because acknowledging it means you'd have to admit you're full of shit and that is what you're arguing.

I love that, completely without irony, you linked the thread about how I claim people here are manipulative, dishonest, and lie, while you're lying and using dishonesty to distract from having to back up your claims. Including, but not limited to, claiming that because the politics mods are known bad mods, your lies don't matter and should count anyway.

[–]violentintenttoday[S] -2ポイント-1ポイント  (65子コメント)

How much are you even bothering to read the rules, considering you responded to the automod telling you NOT to use the "suggest a title" with "but I used suggest a title!"?

As I told you in the other thread, the title changed, but not at the time the thread was removed as I checked.

So basically you're admitting to following this thread from undelete and then responding to a removed thread?. I have captured screenshots which will be reported to the admins for brigading so that your account can receive a sitewide ban.

They can check that you clicked through. See ya later..

[–]Batty-KodaTIL mod 0ポイント1ポイント  (64子コメント)

lol, you go ahead and do that. You seem very confused on what brigading is. Let me know when the admins are coming for me for commenting (and not voting) in response to you, which you linked, and in context of the thread.

Now back on topic: So it's your claim that before it broke the rules they removed it for breaking a rule that it didn't break, and it's just coincidence it now breaks the rule they claimed it broke? And you have what evidence to provide for this? And, given it now breaks the rule, do you still claim it shouldn't have been removed?

[–]violentintenttoday[S] -3ポイント-2ポイント  (63子コメント)

So you don't care about the other 2 links? GTFO, cancer

[–]Batty-KodaTIL mod 0ポイント1ポイント  (62子コメント)

So the defense of your lies is "but there's other stuff"?

What's the name of the fallacy for just throwing out everything you can and seeing what sticks? Or throwing in bad data with good, claiming it's good data, so you can overstate your case?

What's the matter, you can't make your point with an honest argument, so you have to resort to dishonesty? Why not just reconsider your argument instead of being dishonest?

[–]violentintenttoday[S] -2ポイント-1ポイント  (61子コメント)

You're cancer defending cancer. This sub has been establishing a trend on suppression in politics and they have a pretty solid history. You walked in and found one thing you can pick at and that's all you're doing. You're not establishing anything except the fact you're biased.

[–]Batty-KodaTIL mod 0ポイント1ポイント  (60子コメント)

So the defense of your lies is "but there's other stuff"?

What's the name of the fallacy for just throwing out everything you can and seeing what sticks? Or throwing in bad data with good, claiming it's good data, so you can overstate your case?

I mean, if you admit you're lying I've got nothing else to say here. I'm biased because I'm pointing out that your story isn't consistent and you can't back up your claims? That ain't me being biased, that's you hoping others are biased enough to ignore the evidence you used for your conclusion, because they like your conclusion.

You're not annoyed by my "bias." You're annoyed I didn't have the bias in your favor that you were relying on to mislead people. Anchoring is a nice easy to abuse cognitive bias for people like you, isn't it?

[–]violentintenttoday[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (51子コメント)

WAH WAH WAH THE SUBREDDIT I MOD WAS CALLED OUT ON UNDELETE AND NOW I'M GOING TO BE A BABY CUNT ABOUT EVERYTHING HERE.

That about sum up your stance?

[–]Batty-KodaTIL mod 0ポイント1ポイント  (50子コメント)

Nah, my stance is that you're lying, and the only person to bring up TIL here is you, in another distraction attempt.

Oh well, if all you can do is go "lalala 2+2=5 but you're not allowed to question me because you're a MOD" then I think that shows you're full of shit to a degree that even undelete probably won't bite on your bullshit victim story.

[–]violentintenttoday[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (49子コメント)

Third time

you are just looking for ANYTHING to bitch about. Fuck off.

[–]violentintenttoday[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (7子コメント)

Like I told you in the other thread on undelete you're being pissy in

you are just looking for ANYTHING to bitch about. Fuck off.

[–]Batty-KodaTIL mod 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

Even if you were right, it doesn't matter what I'm motivated by, you're still lying. And you have no defense for it, so you just attack me.

[–]violentintenttoday[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (5子コメント)

No, you're the liar and I have the good sense not to waste any energy on someone like you. If I had a sceenshot you'd say it was altered. If I had some archive you'd say it was a cached version. If I had a notarized polaroid you'd claim I faked the notary seal.

Meanwhile there are two other links of this, and a very long track record of politics pulling this exact shit