I am no longer reading comments by certain people that I know are posting negative things on these blogs. So, enjoy repeatedly commenting and wasting your time but as soon as I see your name I will ignore it.
I am no longer reading comments by certain people that I know are posting negative things on these blogs. So, enjoy repeatedly commenting and wasting your time but as soon as I see your name I will ignore it.
It certainly is much easier to do that rather than engage in debate and prove your opponent wrong.
she doesnt need to "prove" anything.
Correct. Nor do I need to be forced to see her posts and automatically agree with everything.
And if I disagree, I don't need to stay silent.
So she exercises her rights, and I exercise mine.
Sounds fair to me.
Why is it so important to you?
Because while you are shitting on sjw tatics you are doing the exact same thing.
Most of your disagreements are bullshit/fallices and have nothing to do with the post just meant to enrage the poster.
Not sure if it was you (on mobile) but why is it consider proof she is lying because she is sharing her experience and recieving money? God forbid a victim recieves something benefical for speaking out about abuse. People need money to survive and there is no way I would use that to shame others, its silly.
Hello roninwoods, thanks for the comment.
Would you mind elaborating on which SJW tactics I am using?
When you say "most of my disagreements" are bullshit, what do you mean by that? That you don't agree with them?
I reply not to enrage the poster, but to stimulate debate about something that I believe is wrong. It may enrage you and all the other sensitive commenters who insist on resorting to ad-hominem attacks and downvoting to silence a voice of dissent.
But you are conflating when you say that I post to enrage. Causality, causality.
To address the final part of your comment, I challenge you or anyone who cares to, to go and read my posting history, and find a post where I say @lauralemons is lying.
If you invest the time, you will come to realize I never said - or implied - such thing.
Take it for what it is, but it is interesting this was her first assumption .. that I had accused her of lying.
While we may disagree on the following (I, for one, have no trouble with disagreement and different points of view ;)), it seems immoral, dubious and inauthentic that she is attempting to profit from her victimization.
It's clearly a conflict of interest - in my opinion.
And in much the same way she can decide to post on the internet for all to see about anything she wants, I too can post my opinions in response. Someone else in the thread said it right, this is not a blog with comments disabled, it's a two-way street.
Some people are not gonna like what some other people write, how could it ever be any other way?
You see, the difference is that I still want @stellabelle and @lauralemons to post their opinions, they want mine silenced.
At some point, you've gotta ask why.
That is also called denial.
This isn't just a blog. You may be used to writing blogs and having no one comment on them, but here you have to be able to take criticism or people calling out to the reality of your content. It seems more like a sci-fi blog these days, and the actions you have taken strongly suggest it being more lies the way you get so self-defensive about the slightest thing.