[Report]Trolling in election thread

[Kravanica]

If I edit it, yes.

Aw, see? You can learn from your mistakes. There is hope! Now, go back and read carefully all the responses to your reaching misinterpretation and see if you can't unwind what you got wrong there and you'll have accomplished two things...it'll be a super productive afternoon for you.

[Kravanica]

Maybe if you're snarky enough, all the facts will back you up instead!

You're an adorable little scamp. You were invited to talk of substance. You could have pointed to something, anything, that would have bolstered your paranoid version of what she was saying by pointing to a public position that she held that was in deep contrast to what she actually did. If this were the epidemic problem you want us to truly believe it to be then in her 30 years of public service there would be a litany if instances where this would demonstrably be the case.

These, for point of reference, would be things that are commonly referred to as 'facts.' There are things where you can point to things she said in contrast to things she did. Concrete shit. Thirty years of public service, even if she didn't understand nuance and where to use it there would be at least a few instances where what she stated in public would run afowl of shit she had to do because there are a myriad of factors that play into individual decisions. It would be a spirited discussion of policy and the actual direction we decide to go as a country.

You have chosen not to do that. You have chosen to stomp your foot on the ground and insist that she is saying something she is not and then whine that no one believes you.

One of these approaches provokes substantive considered responses. One the forum equivalent of roughing your hair and going, "Sure...sure...run along now ya little scamp."

[Kravanica]

Still you say nothing.



What question was being asked that I juked?

What public policy has she stated that she as then done something else entirely? What, in her 30 year record, has demonstrated your thesis? Not the wikileak, actual things that actually happened.

Or, you can continue to complain that people aren't nice to you. I don't give a shit either way. You're low hanging fruit.

[Old Tyrannia]

The first two posts are non-actionable. The third does constitute a personal attack, albeit mild, so I've applied a wrist slap.

[Kravanica]

The first two posts are non-actionable. The third does constitute a personal attack, albeit mild, so I've applied a wrist slap.

Thank you, Tyrannia. However, can I get a second opinion please? I'm not sure what purpose those posts serve beyond trolling/flamebaiting that player.

[Old Tyrannia]

The first two posts are non-actionable. The third does constitute a personal attack, albeit mild, so I've applied a wrist slap.

Thank you, Tyrannia. However, can I get a second opinion please? I'm not sure what purpose those posts serve beyond trolling/flamebaiting that player.

I've asked for a second opinion to be given.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

The first two posts are non-actionable. The third does constitute a personal attack, albeit mild, so I've applied a wrist slap.

Thank you, Tyrannia. However, can I get a second opinion please? I'm not sure what purpose those posts serve beyond trolling/flamebaiting that player.

Condescending in tone, but not actionable. The ruling stands.