Waspocalypse wrote:Heloin wrote:No, you stated that you stopped helping her when she was rude. If you did you didn't initially state that you had.
You likely don't based on your still posting here complaining about it but I couldn't be certain.
If that's what you argued then you didn't argue it well. If the person you told a story about ever existed and this isn't just a colourful metaphor.
It's less that and more I think you likely don't treat others with the common decency you pretend to care about.
"after she scolded me, my goodwill was through" =/= my assistance stopped.
Goodwill is about readiness, reluctance, and anger.
"I couldn´t be certain"
Yet you asserted my position. Therein lies the root of all mischaracterisations you made about me and my arguments.
Therein, too, lies the bad attitude: it is assumed that anything other than self-flagellating readiness to divine the correct pronoun is indicative of a lack of respect / refusal. Things just aren´t that balck-and-white.
"You didn´t argue well"
Yes, I made a mistake in assuming good faith on the part of those who´d read my answer.
"Colourfull metaphor"
Your refusal to accept reality as such is becoming a persistent pattern.
"You likely don´t treat"
"You pretend"
More unfounded assertions, when earlier you admitted there was no certainty on your part. Earlier you wrote that you were "not pretending to be polite". Perhaps you assume the worst in me because you assume me to be similarly disposed as yourself? Your attitude, however, is not a standard. Nor even a sub-standard. Your attitude is a problem. As are the replies that spring from it.
They really remind me of Karen on her scooter: she was utterly incapable of perspective, nuance, and courtesy. All she cared about was to shout at someone. She might have been deputed by gender as female, but a woman? Not on my terms. She was a c**t.
Bolded for emphasis. I read this as directed at me but I'd understand a ruling otherwise being that I might be overthinking this.
Waspocalypse wrote:Heloin wrote:Shivering in my boots.
I'm honestly not sure why you think censuring your own swear words is needed.
Ad 1. This vapid reply has now been given twice. Do you have anything substantive to offer? Or shall I take it as a mostly tacid but wholly reluctant acceptance of the arguments it ignores?
Ad 2. When someone is low-key flaming, it is best not to reply with anything that can be taken out of context. Erring on the safe side and all that. As for you being honest... hope springs eternal in my mind.
Trollnaming me.
I'm not sure anything has really crossed the line or not but these two points stuck out to me.
Yes, I know some of the animosity here is my own and I have foe'd them and will avoid interactions like this in the future.