Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,404
He bullies them at every opportunity... Thats stalking.
That's not what I'd describe as stalking.
He bullies them at every opportunity... Thats stalking.
One man's bully is another man's freedom fighter... or something along those lines...I don't see the contradiction, never mind the lie. I don't think that labelling someone a bully implies that they bully literally everyone they interact with, just that it's a fairly standard mode of behaviour for them. You stating that you quite happily bully people when you deem it appropriate seems to fit in with that idea pretty well.
That's not what I'd describe as stalking.
One man's bully is another man's freedom fighter... or something along those lines...
Whining about bullies... I don't know man... it just feels like when fans complain about the refs/officials... just play the game... or don't.
He just denies doing it to everyone and you already torched that straw man.
There's a saying this reminds me of... something involving kitchenware... oh, right. Pots and kettles.
LOL..so now you move on to lying about what Manfred said.
Turns out your only objection is that you don't bully everyone, which I don't think Berzerker was ever claiming you did.
I don't see the contradiction, never mind the lie. I don't think that labelling someone a bully implies that they bully literally everyone they interact with, just that it's a fairly standard mode of behaviour for them. You stating that you quite happily bully people when you deem it appropriate seems to fit in with that idea pretty well.
I haven't seen Berzerker lie.
Oh that's not included in "Free Speech" now all of a sudden? Not interested in defending Tim's right to Free Speech? How cognitive dissonance'y of you...But you'd defend him/"his rights" if he was in the Klan, right?The freedom to bully and stalk people to silence them?
Subject-changing? LOLs...OK...Which "Democrats"? Or maybe, you mean to say like all of them "in general" or similar? In that case... I guess about the same time Republicans etc., stopped believing in it. Is that vague/pointless/nonspecific enough to answer your vague/pointless/nonspecific red herring question? LOLsWhen did the Democrats start believing in freedom?
More whataboutism/changing the subject? Strawanning too?... and anyway, if you're going to disingenuously try and construe metaphors/expressions/colloquialisms, literally, then be at least be consistent... I said "man"... so...Seems rather harsh, I doubt Mary would appreciate being told to stop whining.
As Tim has said repeatedly... were all in the same club. .I dont know man... You're in Tim's club...
Stop changing the subject... and if you're going to disingenuously try and construe metaphors/expressions/colloquialisms, literally, then be at least be consistent... I said "man"... so your deflection wouldn't apply.
More subject-changing? LOLs...OK...Which "Democrats"? Or maybe, you mean to say like all of them "in general" or similar? In that case... I guess about the same time Republicans etc., stopped believing in it.
Oh that's not included in "Free Speech" now all of a sudden? Not interested in defending Tim's right to Free Speech? But you'd defend him if he was in the Klan, right?
Anyway...more whining about bullying huh? OK... Was Zimmerman stalking, and ultimately silencing Trayvon Martin? Or is that an exception to your arbitrary self-serving rule somehow?
Here's how... you're drawing a false equivalence... as usual. I said, essentially "rather than whining... either play, or don't". But instead, you're whining, while trying to equate yourself with someone who already chose "don't", while simultaneously implying that my admonition is being applied inconsistently. The comparison fails... as do so many of your arguments. The admonition is consistent, you just aren't heeding it.Your 'advice' to the victims of bullies was to stop whining. How do you apply that advice to only 1 victim and be consistent? No, all those other people whining about bullies should keep whining
"Only Berzerker can change the subject?" is that your position?only Berzerker should stop whining. Is that your position?...Please, can I have another.... lecture about changing the subject?
What personal attacks? You're the one who went on the defensive, complaining about being "abused" and I'm saying that I see no instances of anyone abusing you. The bolding is to draw attention to the points I want to address. Everyone does that here. My "narrative" is not little, thank you. It's entirely pertinent, and it happens to be either how I perceive what I see here, what I know from what I've been told by people whose word I trust, or it's the easily-verified truth (even if some things get edited or deleted, I have a habit of keeping most email notifications from CFC, and that's always the original version of whatever gets posted).I would like you to please stop taking my comments out of context, selectively bolding them, and then quoting them to fit your own little narrative. If your reading comprehension is that bad, then please don't quote me at all. Your continued personal attacks are not appreciated.
As I've already clarified... my use of "Republicans etc." includes Libertarians, so you're covered in the term.Republicans dont believe in freedom either. But the Democrats were hating on freedom long before the Republicans showed up.
Here's how... you're drawing a false equivalence... as usual. I said, essentially "rather than whining... either play, or don't". But instead, you're whining, while trying to equate yourself with someone who already chose "don't", while simultaneously implying that my admonition is being applied inconsistently. The comparison fails... as do so many of your arguments. The admonition is consistent, you just aren't heeding it.
"Only Berzerker can change the subject?" is that your position?
As I've already clarified... "Republicans etc." includes Libertarians, so you're covered in the term.
Also... You're fabricating a nonexistent temporal distinction. Thomas Jefferson was the first "Democratic-Republican" POTUS and he was a slaveowner... so... wrong again... as usual.
She left the discussion/threads where she was feeling uncomfortable with the conversation and unhappy with the direction/content. You haven't. So there is zero equivalence. Period. No amount your usual whataboutism, strawanning, red-herrings, and logic twisting will change that.But she did complain...
Strawanning. I never said any of that.Here's your logic, nobody should 'whine' about being bullied if they dont leave the forum.
So you're a victim now? OK but this is a discussion forum, not a workplace, or classroom where you have to stay. You're not being waylaid in some dark alley. You're choosing to continue in a discussion where you're claiming that someone is bullying you, when you could just choose not to participate... so as an aside... and a reminder... Trayvon can't can't speak out cause hes dead at the hands of the guy in your "club". You really want to continue the discussion. Your arguments are poor/faulty, but its frustrating you that you keep getting debunked... so you're playing the victim as a tactic/deflection.So the victims of bullying cant stay and speak out against the bullies because thats whining.
It's hypocrisy for you to complain about people not respecting/advocating "Free Speech" then complaining and trying to suppress the speech of others when its unfavorable to you. It's also hypocrisy for you to complain about people supposedly "stalking" and "silencing" you for conduct/speech they subjectively deemed offensive... after your full throated defense of Zimmerman's stalking and silencing of Trayvon for simply acting/being subjectively "suspicious".No, my position is its hypocritical for you to complain about me changing the subject when thats what you're doing.
Nobody wants to turn the other cheek.You're choosing to continue in a discussion where you're claiming that someone is bullying you, when you could just choose not to participate...
Its less about turning the other cheek, and more about crocodile tears. When I first joined this particular thread, it was because I'd read @Valka D'Ur 's post that @MaryKB had left the discussion, because she was uncomfortable/upset with how she was feeling treated. As has already been observed in this discussion by others, feelings are subjective so its not as productive to argue over whether a persons feelings were justified or not. But to me her departure made her claims of feeling bullied/mistreated credible... in the sense that I believe that she really felt that way... and left because of it, and I felt badly for her, since I like Mary.Nobody wants to turn the other cheek.
One man's bully is another man's freedom fighter... or something along those lines...
Whining about bullies... I don't know man... it just feels like when fans complain about the refs/officials... just play the game... or don't.
Turns out it was Brennan! You're off the hook bruh.
This place doesn't appear to be very welcoming to people from over there... I realize that a lot has to do with forum culture being different, with different standards for moderation, and different unwritten rules of behavior that aren't generally learned until you break one and don't even realize it until people start yelling at you.