The Gaming Den

Crissa wrote:Uhh, no. Calling someone names, while they're being attacked here and there by Roy is cheering on Roy's behavior.

Crissa, don't be stupid. Calling people names for having bad arguments is a not cheering on Roy. I had Roy on fucking ignore. I didn't even know what he was saying, not that insulting someone else constitutes cheering people on even if I did know what he was saying.

Crissa wrote:Kaelik is just demonstrating how he 'responds' to my posts by posting more on a subject than I did. What he did here is called a 'simple refutation', as in, saying 'nuh-uh, didn't do it.' Then he brought up a series of topics which are irrelevant to this thread, or his actions then. Kaelik even quoted a different post than the one linked to.

Yeah, it's almost like some retarded idiot named Crissa, after someone else called her on how her link didn't point to anyone encouraging other people to drive away women, responded with a stupid cop out like "Well, you'd have to read through the thread to find him specifically cheering Roy on, but the point stands that he did do it."

So I read through the thread (by which I mean, searched for my posts in the thread, and presented them in their entirety for the people who didn't feel like reading a whole thread just to find out you lied again.)

For Valor wrote:No, the first quote Kaelik put up there was the one you linked.

So get over yourself. Kaelik has delivered a smashing victory.

He is victoriously parading a post I didn't link to and only tangentially referred to. I only linked to one post. I later said that his other posts could be somewhere, which, apparently isn't in that thread. I can be wrong about that.

But he's still being an ass to a newbie, who was hounded by Roy, and not actually adding to the discussion.

Why?

-Crissa

Kaelik apparently thinks that other people are mind-readers, and can know his intention, rather than his actual behavior. If Roy says 'Hillshire' and Kaelik replies 'Farm!' it really doesn't matter if Kaelik had Roy on ignore, his statement would still appear a cheer.

You said he was encouraging Roy. He showed you he wasn't. Now you're saying "if two people act similarly, they encourage each other, even if one of them doesn't know it."

You're calling him out for doing something even though he didn't know he was doing it. That's logic for grade-school children, Crissa.

"So get over yourself, Kaelik has delivered a smashing victory."

Yes. Because there is no way for me, or anyone else, to know what's going on in his fucking mind when he did it.

You're an idiot.

He's still being an asshole to a newbie in a thread that wouldn't exist without Roy.

-Crissa

Because there is no way for me, or anyone else, to know what's going on in his fucking mind when he did it.

And yet you're quite convinced that you do have knowledge of his inner mental workings.

Crissa wrote:Yes. Because there is no way for me, or anyone else, to know what's going on in his fucking mind when he did it.

You're an idiot.

He's still being an asshole to a newbie in a thread that wouldn't exist without Roy.

-Crissa

THERE is the change in argument. Kaelik's prediction "Attempt to sideline away from answering this question because you know you are wrong" just came true.

For you not knowing his mind, he seems to know yours pretty well.

Some of us really suck, huh. My fear is that by noticing that I've just been dragged into it.