You are replying to a comment that has an answer to your question: an emphatic no.
First, the comment literally does not have the word “no” in it.
Second, as a reminder the question was, “Are you against genocide and voting for genocidal candidates?” You are telling me the answer, which was like pulling teeth over 7+ comment exchanges, is “no”. Got it. Will log that in the ol’ memory bank. You are either not against genocide or believe you should vote for genocidal candidates, or both.
That is indeed consistent with the dissembling zi mentioned before and why there is such cognitive dissonance: because people that hold that opinion are often embarrassed of it, they know it (correctly) makes them look like either monsters or those complicit with them, having no respectable principles.
This continued dishonesty and gaslighting can now come to an end.
First, the comment literally does not have the word “no” in it.
Are you joking? Well, for fuck’s sake: no. There it is. I’ve answered so many variations of “I do not support genocide or genocidal candidates” that I’m genuinely baffled you haven’t figured it out yet. What is wrong with you??
Second, as a reminder the question was, “Are you against genocide and voting for genocidal candidates?”
No, it was “do you support” them.
You are telling me the answer, which was like pulling teeth over 7+ comment exchanges, is “no”.
No, I told you that long, long ago.
Got it. Will log that in the ol’ memory bank.
Why are you being sarcastic?
You are either not against genocide or believe you should vote for genocidal candidates, or both.
Nope. Neither. (:
That is indeed consistent with the dissembling zi mentioned before and why there is such cognitive dissonance
There has been no dissembling or cognitive dissonance: that is merely your unfounded accusation, apropos of absolutely fuckin’ nothing. You’re just arguing this for the sake of it at this point, i.e. trolling. I also don’t quite understand why you said “zi”.
because people that hold that opinion are often embarrassed of it, they know it (correctly) makes them look like either monsters or those complicit with them, having no respectable principles.
Yes, I agree with that assessment of such a person that you described.
However, I never actually said what you’re claiming I did.
I have done neither, thanks.
In the very comment I’m replying to, you literally just took my answer as the inverse of what it was (by pretending you asked the reverse of what you did), and did so in complete seriousness, expecting me to actually fall for it.
Are you joking? Well, for fuck’s sake: no. There it is.
You’re acting like I’m the silly one. I’ve reminded you that it is a yes or no question and I’m looking for a yes or a no 5-6 times at least. The sentence I was responding to incorrectly claimed you gave an emphatic no when you 100% had not even said the word, let alone emphatically.
I’ve answered so many variations of “I do not support genocide or genocidal candidates” that I’m genuinely baffled you haven’t figured it out yet.
You have not. You have, as I have noted repeatedly, starting going off talking about how this is a complex topic and oh here is an electoral rationalization and hey look over there an insult and oh man it is a loaded question (though it isn’t) so you can’t answer.
What is wrong with you??
Nothing, I’m being normal and reasonable. If this were a face to face conversation you’d be the person reminded to answer a yes or no question with yes or a no five times in a row while dithering lol.
No, it was “do you support” them.
I put the question in quotation marks because it was verbatim what I asked. Your next reply is the one that you called an “emphatic no” as it if were so obvious. Take all the time you need to put together the mystery of question-answer.
No, I told you that long, long ago.
lol bullshit. The teeth pulling and whining about loaded questions. I asked for a direct yes or no answer many times and you refused.
Why are you being sarcastic?
Because I suspected you would dither again and maybe even contradict yourself, as is the tendency of folks that behave like yourself.
Nope. Neither. (:
Hey look I was right about contradicting yourself.
There has been no dissembling or cognitive dissonance
Just 10+ comments of you trying to avoid a yes or no question to talk about trite electoral logic instead and trying to pretend it was a loaded question.
that is merely your unfounded accusation
I didn’t think it would need explanation since we were both there and it is right above us in the comment chain. Eventually, every person dishonestly invested in deflection tires themselves out and gets confused, then starts blaming others for it.
apropos of absolutely fuckin’ nothing
I don’t think you know what that idiom means.
You’re just arguing this for the sake of it at this point, i.e. trolling. I also don’t quite understand why you said “zi”.
There is almost nothing to argue about. We have reached the point where you can’t follow a linearly-ordered question and answer nor recognize what quotation marks mean, leading to a situation where you want to pretend I didn’t ask the thing I copy + pasted from just a few comments ago. It is you just dithering and getting confused because you can’t give a straight answer to a yes or no question and stand by it.
“zi” is just a typo.
Yes, I agree with that assessment of such a person that you described.
It describes your behavior.
However, I never actually said what you’re claiming I did.
I am claiming you gave a “no” answer to my question. You know, the thing you are saying you emphatically did do. The thing you tried to get sassy about in the beginning of your comment and are now trying to walk back lmao. The only question is: deeply confused or trying to play with the truth? Could go either way, there is plenty of precedent for either.
In the very comment I’m replying to, you literally just took my answer as the inverse of what it was (by pretending you asked the reverse of what you said)
I’m going to go with “deeply confused”. No need for me to keep repeating the same things about quotes and linear time.
and did so in complete seriousness, expecting me to actually fall for it.
Ah yes my dastardly plan of asking a simple yes or no question in plain text and then taking your " emphatic no" and trying to move on. Alas. Now we get to return to your favorite topic: hearing me ask the question again and again to see if you would like to join the world of those with the courage of their convictions and stand by a yes or no answer. Are you excited?
Gaslighting, clear as day.
I have no intention to make you feel crazy. I am trying to keep you focused, if anything. And I have described what happened quite accurately. Please take as much time as you need to compare what I have said to our comments and ask questions if something doesn’t add up to you.
But now we get back to your favorite ever thing. Since you are apparently very confused about what question you gave an “emohatic no” to, and now want to take it back, I will just ask it again. Remember,! Vakid answers are “yes” or “no”! I believe in you! You can reveal your position on it! You’ve got this!
Are you against genocide and voting for genocidal candidates?
Okay, for the first part I can piece it together despite the wrong pronoun and understanding you to be saying that you are against genocide. So you are answering “yes” to the first half of the question. You claim to be against genocide. Great.
For the second one I cannot easily parse. I did not ask who you support, for example, but instead asked about having a red ljnr when it comes to voting. But let’s say you are saying “no” to the second half of my question, i.e. the only way I can grasp for clarity here. The second half of my question is, “Are you against […] voting for genocidal candidates?” If you are saying no to this, that puts us back to the last comment, where you were pitching a fit about me understanding your “no” to mean “no” and not a hidden third mystery thing.
If I were to be generous, it may be that you think I am asking if you are personally voting for genocidal candidates and you are substituting your own term (“support”). i.e. you thought I was asking, “Are you […] voting for genocidal candidates?” That would reverse the meaning of your answer. And that would put us away back to square one, which is you claiming it is not so simple. But of course it is that simple, you just say that genocide is unacceptable and that you will never vote for a genocider.
Sure, pretend to have trouble reading, that helps your case so much
It isn’t fucking hard
“Yes, I’m against genocide, and against supporting genocidal candidates”
How is that the wrong pronoun? Genocide and genocidal candidates add up to more than one thing.
“No, I don’t support genocide or genocidal candidates”
Really not hard to parse whatsoever.
Why do you have to act like things are so hard? I’ve answered your question so many fucking times and you still haven’t actually responded to it. You instead just continue to act as if i haven’t answered. Instead of continuing the discussion, you’re just keeping us trapped here, locked in this endless cycle of you asking the question and me answering, over and over until the eventual heat death of the universe.
The crazy thing is, looking through your comment history at your general opinions, it seems we actually agree on almost everything. So why are you so mad at me?
You’re just fucking trolling at this point. Fuck off
Sure, pretend to have trouble reading, that helps your case so much
I’m not pretending, you used language ambiguously. Like I said, wrong pronoun for the first one, namely wrong plurality. Is it one thing or several? I asked about one thing in the first part of my question. So you make me have to guess about what you mean. And then you throw a tantrum when I patiently try to work around you and explain. You could, instead, recognize your ambiguity and clarify.
Similarly, the second part of question did not ask who you support, but then your answer implied it did. What should I guess from that? Well, you can see my attempts.
It isn’t fucking hard
It is obviously incredibly difficult to get a direct answer given how long this thread is.
“Yes, I’m against genocide, and against supporting genocidal candidates”
How is that the wrong pronoun?
You are confused about what quotation marks are used for, again. You never said that sentence, which literally only has one pronoun, in the conjunction “I’m”. I am obviously not confused about that. Here is what you wrote:
Yes I’m against them
No, i don’t support them
I’ve already said this multiple times
Why pretend otherwise?
It’s the “them”, in the first sentence, which is a plural pronoun. The first part of my question asks about one thing, genocide. Not plural.
You should thank me for patient I am with you.
Genocide and genocidal candidates add up to more than one thing.
You gave a no answer to one and a yes to the other. Obviously the “them” cannot mean both simultaneously.
“No, I don’t support genocide or genocidal candidates”
Really not hard to parse whatsoever.
Another set of quotes used for something you didn’t say. And remember, the question you are responding to did not ask about your support. You keep confusing yourself with this. The question was whether you are (1) against genocide and whether you are (2) against voting for genocidal candidates.
Why do you have to act like things are so hard
As I have demonstrated, you have a bad habit of inserting terms when allegedly answering a yes or no question. And ambiguous and inappropriate pronouns.
Personally, I would prefer to not talk about language and clarity but this is the nonsense you have me deal with instead of just sticking with a clear yes or no to my yes or no question that it took you 4-5 reminders to even attempt answering.
I’ve answered your question so many fucking times and you still haven’t actually responded to it.
When you claimed to have provided an “emphatic no” to my question (“Are you against genocide and voting for genocidal candidates?”) I did respond to it, remember? A “no” response to that question, which you claimed to have provided an “emphatic no” to, would mean you are not against genocide and/or you are not against voting for genocidal candidates. I generously assumed you are actually against genocide since some of your other comments said so, and openly xonclyded that this means you are not against voting for genocidal candidates. Then I went off for a while about what that meant. Then you accused me of misinterpreting your “emphatic no” to my yes or no question.
And now we are back at “can this person provide a clear yes or no answer”. I have even offered you two interpretations of the second half of my question and dusentangled the parts so that you can clearly describe your meaning in the terms in which I presented my question. Instead you’re throwing in your own new phrasings.
Anyways, I will attempt to work with your new framings at the end, at least a little. I am too patient.
You instead just continue to act as if i haven’t answered. Instead of continuing the discussion, you’re just keeping us trapped here, locked in this endless cycle of you asking the question and me answering, over and over until the eventual heat death of the universe.
Remember, I would rather you just gave yes or no response to my yes or no question. You decided to play around and say unclear things.
It seems that your “emphatic no” is really a “yes” with unclear pronouns and reframings but somehow this is my fault.
The crazy thing is, looking through your comment history at your general opinions, it seems we actually agree on almost everything. So why are you so mad at me?
I am not mad at you. I am dismissive of you for trying to avoid my question like every other liberal and for trying to pretend the situation is not as simple as I presented it. It actually is, liberals just try to treat their inconsistency and cognitive dissonance as some kind of nuanced complexity.
Regarding having to ask you questions over and over again and try to get you to directly and clearly provide an answer you will stand by: that is obviously me being very latient with you.
You’re just fucking trolling at this point. Fuck off
Do a modicum of self-criticism on this exchange and you will see that I am correct in my responses. You are behaving defensively and have said several contradictory things. Unfortunately, you have also done so while trying to shore up liberal excuses for supporting genocide, such as the alleged complexity of big standard liberal electoral logic, and refuse to recognize that it is a dead simple as answering a yes or no question. And look at how much work it has taken you to do that simple thing, with my help. It was not complex. This is literally fifth grade discourse we are having here. But hoo boy, how much did you write that was not just saying “yes” or “no”?
Anyways, apparently your answer to my question is actually “yes”. You announce, for suresies, that you are against genocide and against voting for genocidal candidates. I am glad we are in agreement!
You are replying to a comment that has an answer to your question: an emphatic no.
This continued dishonesty and gaslighting can now come to an end.
First, the comment literally does not have the word “no” in it.
Second, as a reminder the question was, “Are you against genocide and voting for genocidal candidates?” You are telling me the answer, which was like pulling teeth over 7+ comment exchanges, is “no”. Got it. Will log that in the ol’ memory bank. You are either not against genocide or believe you should vote for genocidal candidates, or both.
That is indeed consistent with the dissembling zi mentioned before and why there is such cognitive dissonance: because people that hold that opinion are often embarrassed of it, they know it (correctly) makes them look like either monsters or those complicit with them, having no respectable principles.
I have done neither, thanks.
Are you joking? Well, for fuck’s sake: no. There it is. I’ve answered so many variations of “I do not support genocide or genocidal candidates” that I’m genuinely baffled you haven’t figured it out yet. What is wrong with you??
No, it was “do you support” them.
No, I told you that long, long ago.
Why are you being sarcastic?
Nope. Neither. (:
There has been no dissembling or cognitive dissonance: that is merely your unfounded accusation, apropos of absolutely fuckin’ nothing. You’re just arguing this for the sake of it at this point, i.e. trolling. I also don’t quite understand why you said “zi”.
Yes, I agree with that assessment of such a person that you described.
However, I never actually said what you’re claiming I did.
In the very comment I’m replying to, you literally just took my answer as the inverse of what it was (by pretending you asked the reverse of what you did), and did so in complete seriousness, expecting me to actually fall for it.
Gaslighting, clear as day.
You’re acting like I’m the silly one. I’ve reminded you that it is a yes or no question and I’m looking for a yes or a no 5-6 times at least. The sentence I was responding to incorrectly claimed you gave an emphatic no when you 100% had not even said the word, let alone emphatically.
You have not. You have, as I have noted repeatedly, starting going off talking about how this is a complex topic and oh here is an electoral rationalization and hey look over there an insult and oh man it is a loaded question (though it isn’t) so you can’t answer.
Nothing, I’m being normal and reasonable. If this were a face to face conversation you’d be the person reminded to answer a yes or no question with yes or a no five times in a row while dithering lol.
I put the question in quotation marks because it was verbatim what I asked. Your next reply is the one that you called an “emphatic no” as it if were so obvious. Take all the time you need to put together the mystery of question-answer.
lol bullshit. The teeth pulling and whining about loaded questions. I asked for a direct yes or no answer many times and you refused.
Because I suspected you would dither again and maybe even contradict yourself, as is the tendency of folks that behave like yourself.
Hey look I was right about contradicting yourself.
Just 10+ comments of you trying to avoid a yes or no question to talk about trite electoral logic instead and trying to pretend it was a loaded question.
I didn’t think it would need explanation since we were both there and it is right above us in the comment chain. Eventually, every person dishonestly invested in deflection tires themselves out and gets confused, then starts blaming others for it.
I don’t think you know what that idiom means.
There is almost nothing to argue about. We have reached the point where you can’t follow a linearly-ordered question and answer nor recognize what quotation marks mean, leading to a situation where you want to pretend I didn’t ask the thing I copy + pasted from just a few comments ago. It is you just dithering and getting confused because you can’t give a straight answer to a yes or no question and stand by it.
“zi” is just a typo.
It describes your behavior.
I am claiming you gave a “no” answer to my question. You know, the thing you are saying you emphatically did do. The thing you tried to get sassy about in the beginning of your comment and are now trying to walk back lmao. The only question is: deeply confused or trying to play with the truth? Could go either way, there is plenty of precedent for either.
I’m going to go with “deeply confused”. No need for me to keep repeating the same things about quotes and linear time.
Ah yes my dastardly plan of asking a simple yes or no question in plain text and then taking your " emphatic no" and trying to move on. Alas. Now we get to return to your favorite topic: hearing me ask the question again and again to see if you would like to join the world of those with the courage of their convictions and stand by a yes or no answer. Are you excited?
I have no intention to make you feel crazy. I am trying to keep you focused, if anything. And I have described what happened quite accurately. Please take as much time as you need to compare what I have said to our comments and ask questions if something doesn’t add up to you.
But now we get back to your favorite ever thing. Since you are apparently very confused about what question you gave an “emohatic no” to, and now want to take it back, I will just ask it again. Remember,! Vakid answers are “yes” or “no”! I believe in you! You can reveal your position on it! You’ve got this!
Are you against genocide and voting for genocidal candidates?
Yes I’m against them
No, i don’t support them
I’ve already said this multiple times
Why pretend otherwise?
Okay, for the first part I can piece it together despite the wrong pronoun and understanding you to be saying that you are against genocide. So you are answering “yes” to the first half of the question. You claim to be against genocide. Great.
For the second one I cannot easily parse. I did not ask who you support, for example, but instead asked about having a red ljnr when it comes to voting. But let’s say you are saying “no” to the second half of my question, i.e. the only way I can grasp for clarity here. The second half of my question is, “Are you against […] voting for genocidal candidates?” If you are saying no to this, that puts us back to the last comment, where you were pitching a fit about me understanding your “no” to mean “no” and not a hidden third mystery thing.
If I were to be generous, it may be that you think I am asking if you are personally voting for genocidal candidates and you are substituting your own term (“support”). i.e. you thought I was asking, “Are you […] voting for genocidal candidates?” That would reverse the meaning of your answer. And that would put us away back to square one, which is you claiming it is not so simple. But of course it is that simple, you just say that genocide is unacceptable and that you will never vote for a genocider.
Sure, pretend to have trouble reading, that helps your case so much
It isn’t fucking hard
“Yes, I’m against genocide, and against supporting genocidal candidates”
How is that the wrong pronoun? Genocide and genocidal candidates add up to more than one thing.
“No, I don’t support genocide or genocidal candidates”
Really not hard to parse whatsoever.
Why do you have to act like things are so hard? I’ve answered your question so many fucking times and you still haven’t actually responded to it. You instead just continue to act as if i haven’t answered. Instead of continuing the discussion, you’re just keeping us trapped here, locked in this endless cycle of you asking the question and me answering, over and over until the eventual heat death of the universe.
The crazy thing is, looking through your comment history at your general opinions, it seems we actually agree on almost everything. So why are you so mad at me?
You’re just fucking trolling at this point. Fuck off
I’m not pretending, you used language ambiguously. Like I said, wrong pronoun for the first one, namely wrong plurality. Is it one thing or several? I asked about one thing in the first part of my question. So you make me have to guess about what you mean. And then you throw a tantrum when I patiently try to work around you and explain. You could, instead, recognize your ambiguity and clarify.
Similarly, the second part of question did not ask who you support, but then your answer implied it did. What should I guess from that? Well, you can see my attempts.
It is obviously incredibly difficult to get a direct answer given how long this thread is.
You are confused about what quotation marks are used for, again. You never said that sentence, which literally only has one pronoun, in the conjunction “I’m”. I am obviously not confused about that. Here is what you wrote:
It’s the “them”, in the first sentence, which is a plural pronoun. The first part of my question asks about one thing, genocide. Not plural.
You should thank me for patient I am with you.
You gave a no answer to one and a yes to the other. Obviously the “them” cannot mean both simultaneously.
Another set of quotes used for something you didn’t say. And remember, the question you are responding to did not ask about your support. You keep confusing yourself with this. The question was whether you are (1) against genocide and whether you are (2) against voting for genocidal candidates.
As I have demonstrated, you have a bad habit of inserting terms when allegedly answering a yes or no question. And ambiguous and inappropriate pronouns.
Personally, I would prefer to not talk about language and clarity but this is the nonsense you have me deal with instead of just sticking with a clear yes or no to my yes or no question that it took you 4-5 reminders to even attempt answering.
When you claimed to have provided an “emphatic no” to my question (“Are you against genocide and voting for genocidal candidates?”) I did respond to it, remember? A “no” response to that question, which you claimed to have provided an “emphatic no” to, would mean you are not against genocide and/or you are not against voting for genocidal candidates. I generously assumed you are actually against genocide since some of your other comments said so, and openly xonclyded that this means you are not against voting for genocidal candidates. Then I went off for a while about what that meant. Then you accused me of misinterpreting your “emphatic no” to my yes or no question.
And now we are back at “can this person provide a clear yes or no answer”. I have even offered you two interpretations of the second half of my question and dusentangled the parts so that you can clearly describe your meaning in the terms in which I presented my question. Instead you’re throwing in your own new phrasings.
Anyways, I will attempt to work with your new framings at the end, at least a little. I am too patient.
Remember, I would rather you just gave yes or no response to my yes or no question. You decided to play around and say unclear things.
It seems that your “emphatic no” is really a “yes” with unclear pronouns and reframings but somehow this is my fault.
I am not mad at you. I am dismissive of you for trying to avoid my question like every other liberal and for trying to pretend the situation is not as simple as I presented it. It actually is, liberals just try to treat their inconsistency and cognitive dissonance as some kind of nuanced complexity.
Regarding having to ask you questions over and over again and try to get you to directly and clearly provide an answer you will stand by: that is obviously me being very latient with you.
Do a modicum of self-criticism on this exchange and you will see that I am correct in my responses. You are behaving defensively and have said several contradictory things. Unfortunately, you have also done so while trying to shore up liberal excuses for supporting genocide, such as the alleged complexity of big standard liberal electoral logic, and refuse to recognize that it is a dead simple as answering a yes or no question. And look at how much work it has taken you to do that simple thing, with my help. It was not complex. This is literally fifth grade discourse we are having here. But hoo boy, how much did you write that was not just saying “yes” or “no”?
Anyways, apparently your answer to my question is actually “yes”. You announce, for suresies, that you are against genocide and against voting for genocidal candidates. I am glad we are in agreement!
So tell me, why was that so hard for you to say?
It wasn’t hard for me to say, which is why I’ve already said it many times.
Are you ready yet to actually respond to my answer?