What's new

Players only meeting.

Yet, I never did that.

I don't recall saying you did. I don't remember who brought up "rapist" and called him a "predator". They never offered a reason for doing it, so I just took it in context.

I'm not surprised you would take my admission of my error and make it about you.

It's weird how you can translate **** like this into meaning that.

I'm borderline on the autism spectrum, and I can detect context like that. Why can't you?
 
I think the fox can be a number of different types of people like the antifa's distraction of BLM. The Fox can be those who's best interests is motivated by money and profits.

You think most of the antifa are making money from this? If anything, the foxes would include the NBA owners.
 
That doesn't change the wrongness of using a months-old interaction to justify shooting the guy when his back was turned.
Are you not saying I justified the shooting because I called him a rapist? If not, who are you saying justified it because of this?

I'm not surprised you would take my admission of my error and make it about you.
I commend you for doing so. I should have responded and recognized that you did. I was distracted by your next sentence that I read that I justified the shooting because of those details.

I'm so confused.


I'm borderline on the autism spectrum, and I can detect context like that. Why can't you?

Ok?

Maybe is misread what you wrote. Who are you saying justified the shooting?
 
Are you not saying I justified the shooting because I called him a rapist? If not, who are you saying justified it because of this?

Was that you? OK. Why was it relevant to mention that Blake had (allegedly by the law, which is what the police are supposed to use) digitally raped. Please explain the relevance to his being shot in the back. If you can't, I can only go from the context.

Maybe is misread what you wrote. Who are you saying justified the shooting?

I'm saying I can't see any other reason to bring up a criminal history in the context of this particular shooting.
 
Was that you? OK.
This is gold. Maybe you should remember if you're going to say that?!
I'm not surprised you would take my admission of my error and make it about you.
How dare I take something about me and make it about me because you can't remember the conversation.
I'm saying I can't see any other reason to bring up a criminal history in the context of this particular shooting.
His history has nothing to do with him getting shot in the back. No one is saying that.
His, history, however, is certainly up for discussion.
 
This is gold. Maybe you should remember if you're going to say that?!

Again, the post with the "wrongness" quote was about me, not about you.

How dare I take something about me and make it about me because you can't remember the conversation.

This stuff you say about this sounds a lot like JazzyFresh and similar posters. I don't keep track of every quote by every poster.

His history has nothing to do with him getting shot in the back. No one is saying that.
His, history, however, is certainly up for discussion.

Could you explain why it is relevant, please? If it has "nothing to do with him getting shot in the back", why is it in the conversation? Why did you bring it up?
 
Again, the post with the "wrongness" quote was about me, not about you.
I understand the part where you admitted your wrongness. I've commended you for it. I'm not talking about that part or making that about me. I'm talking about what you said directly afterwards that made it about me.

This stuff you say about this sounds a lot like JazzyFresh and similar posters. I don't keep track of every quote by every poster.

Lol.

So when you write garbage or can't follow a conversation because you can't keep track of putting words into other's mouth your next tactic is to say that I remind you of a guy that spews utter garbage and stuff I disagree with?

Yeah, mmmkay.

@LogGrad98 there's a mini me example of Godwin's Law.

Could you explain why it is relevant, please? If it has "nothing to do with him getting shot in the back", why is it in the conversation? Why did you bring it up?

For the 10th time, him being a rapist has nothing to do with him being shot. Are we clear?

A conversation that details more about people being conversed about tends to add more details in things like a discussion forum, the newspaper, radio, television. This is not new.

If people are saying his rape allegation had nothing to do with his shooting, why are you so determined or are going out of your way to try and silence that? Have you read about it, btw?

Thinking the shooting was unjust and could have been handled different and talking about the background of those involved in the incident are not mutually exclusive.
 
It's a very complicated issue. There are many examples of racism or police injustice that aren't skewed to drive the message.

I don't think any man should be shot in the back 8 times. I put blame on the police for not arriving at a better resolution. I also blame Blake, who's a rapists, abuser, chronic police fighting jackass that did exactly what no one should do unless they wanna get shot by the cops. It's really not that hard to me. No one wants to mention that and if you do, you're a "moran."

@One Brow - this is my post where I brought it up.

How I see it is at the end of the day, I believe that black lives matter. And because I believe that I will share my opinions about why they matter, police injustices - but that does not mean I can't recognize poor decisions made by all of those involved. Because I care, I advise everyone not to do what Blake did. If I didn't admit this part, would black lives really matter to me? No.


Oh, I brought it up because I had just finished reading about it online and it made me pissed. Sorry, but not sorry I brought that up.
 
I have an idea: Make them keep their gun in their trunk, and record every time they open the locker.

Also, why don't cops have smart guns?
I didn't know if you were saying smart guns in a sarcastic way or if that really existed. I googled it. TIL about smart guns.
 
For the 10th time, him being a rapist has nothing to do with him being shot. Are we clear?

The high school he attended has nothing to do with him being shot. The make of his car has nothing to do with him being shot. The color of his shoes has nothing to with him being shot. His (alleged) criminal activity has nothing to do with him being shot. Of all of these (and hundreds more), you chose to bring up the criminal activity. Of all the irrelevant things, why did this one, in particular, enter the conversation?

A conversation that details more about people being conversed about tends to add more details in things like a discussion forum, the newspaper, radio, television. This is not new.

There are hundreds of details you could have added to the conversation. Of all of these , you chose to bring up the criminal activity. Of all the details, why did this one, in particular, enter the conversation?

If people are saying his rape allegation had nothing to do with his shooting, why are you so determined or are going out of your way to try and silence that?

Far from silencing you, I'm asking you to explain. Of all the comments to be made on this incident, why did this one, in particular, enter the conversation?

Have you read about it, btw?

Which "it"? I read about the shooting, and I actually posted a link to the contents of the criminal complaint (which I also read). Why does this matter to the conversation more than the color of Blake's shoes, and if doesn't matter, why talk about it instead of the color of Blake's shoes?

Note: I'm not asking to discuss Blake's shoes. I'm interested in why you think you brought in the rape allegation.

Thinking the shooting was unjust and could have been handled different and talking about the background of those involved in the incident are not mutually exclusive.

There are many things to talk about, some of which are irrelevant. Why did the rape allegation, in particular, enter the conversation?
 
Oh, I brought it up because I had just finished reading about it online and it made me pissed. Sorry, but not sorry I brought that up.

So, you were angry at Blake, and decided to express that anger in a way that diminished his victim hood in this situation?
 
Top