Players only meeting.

Archie Moses

Well-Known Member
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.
 

Archie Moses

Well-Known Member
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.
 

Archie Moses

Well-Known Member
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.
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
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?
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
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?
 

Archie Moses

Well-Known Member
So, you were angry at Blake, and decided to express that anger in a way that diminished his victim hood in this situation?
Reading details about someone's sexual misconduct upsets me. Why am I not surprised that you're twisting this into meaning bringing it up diminishes his victim hood? Have I not said multiple times that I don't agree with him or anyone getting shot in the back 8 times and that what happened to him was wrong and could have been handled differently?

You keep making things mutually exclusive, when they're not. Just because someone mentions someone's sexual misconduct in a discussion, it does not equate to meaning they don't see the injustice of shooting someone 8 times in the back. If someone says that people shouldn't resist arrest and fight with police officers that doesn't equate to meaning that person thinks the cops can shoot someone in the back 8 times. You just wanna see it as all or nothing, from your POV or it's wrong and you have a, "agree with me 100% or you're against me mentality."

You brought up you being on the spectrum so I'm not sure if this is just how you're wired. I've tried, in multiple ways, to give my perspective and thoughts and you take them to meaning something they're not. Stop putting words in my mouth. Stop translating it into your bias perspective. You keep telling me to write it clearer, but how about reading better and not translating things out of context? It's tiring being told you're doing something you're not because someone else is so closed minded.

Lastly, I feel pretty normal pretty normal knowing that reading about sexual misconduct is upsetting. The cops could randomly pick someone on Facebook to slaughter and if later the world learned that random person was a rapist, I would be a) be livid upset about the cops and b) upset knowing that person was a rapist. I would never use that as a reason for a person being treated unjustly by the cops though.

Look, man. I don't care to go deeper into a one sided argument with you. You can lable me what you want or read into things in a short sighted way or whatever. At the end if the day, I just want the world to be a better place.
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
Reading details about someone's sexual misconduct upsets me. Why am I not surprised that you're twisting this into meaning bringing it up diminishes his victim hood?
You still haven't offered any other meaning or reason. I have only your context to go on. Your context was: in the middle of paragraph where you listed the things Blake did wrong (things which made him partially responsible for his own shooting in your mind, AFAICT), you added "rapist".

Have I not said multiple times that I don't agree with him or anyone getting shot in the back 8 times and that what happened to him was wrong and could have been handled differently?
Yes, you have.

You keep making things mutually exclusive, when they're not.
Me? You won't find a larger supporter of the notion that people can feel in seemingly contradictory ways about the same thing than I. You're the one insisting you feel the shooting was bad, so you can't also be reducing Blake's victim hood.

Still, I'll try a little more to be clear that I don't believe in all-or-nothing here.

Just because someone mentions someone's sexual misconduct in a discussion, it does not equate to meaning they don't see the injustice of shooting someone 8 times in the back. If someone says that people shouldn't resist arrest and fight with police officers that doesn't equate to meaning that person thinks the cops can shoot someone in the back 8 times. You just wanna see it as all or nothing, from your POV or it's wrong and you have a, "agree with me 100% or you're against me mentality."
I think that Blake being a rapist, or his earlier behavior, makes him in no way responsible for what happened to him. As far as I can tell, you think both that the cops erred, and also that Blake is partly responsible for what happened to him, but for some reason yo udon't want to say that.

You keep telling me to write it clearer, but how about reading better and not translating things out of context?
I've worked hard on reading context, and I don't think I have it wrong here.

It's tiring being told you're doing something you're not because someone else is so closed minded.
It's tiring reading someone denying what they are implying, and taking no responsibility for how they come across.
 

Archie Moses

Well-Known Member
Arguing with @One Brow is like arguing with fog. It's not surprising people on here that make fun of pictures from 10 years ago agree with people on the spectrum.


I've tried, in length to show that I agree with so many that continue to bitch about what I say because I offer more than their blinded, biased one sideness.

At the end of the day, I'm 100% happy who I am as a person. :)
 
Top