naraku360

Have you ever heard of rhetoric? The example was about the principle behind your argument of shouting people down. The literal example being a school shooting is irrelevant to the point. The point was about not making it easier for conservatives to smear us. You're the one hung up on the specific hypothetical. Would you hold a parent responsible if they handed a child a fork and pointed to an exposed power outlet? Should a conservative be held socially responsible if they start throwing out the n-word? See? The example is interchangeable. It doesn't have to be a school shooting. I also compared ammo to Ginguy jerking it into a sock after getting fucking destroyed in the midterms. But lets ignore the very clear use of euphemism for the sake of whining that the example was too extreme. That's how principles are tested: extremes. I'm not going to spell this out again. I think this is more than clear enough and if you don't get it, someone else can explain.

You're saying the best method of dealing with people like Ginguy is to shout them down. I'm saying that looks bad to normies and makes it easier for them to smear the left. Did you forget 2016? Right now, the right is the one looking ridiculous. I don't give a fuck what you say to or about Ginguy. He's a piece of shit loser. My escalation was an example of the logic you were using. Because neither you nor I would argue a school would not be responsible if their weapon store made it easier for kids to get weapons. We are responsible for the optics of the left. It has nothing to do with the paper-thin egos of snowflake conservatives. And to answer your question: If you think A. It would be absurd to have a gun store in a school, and B. A woman being murdered for a rejection does not hold blame you are therefore suggesting a school with a gun store has done wrong and a woman rejecting advances has not. You and I both know the school with a gun store should be held responsible on some level because obviously they should. Neither you nor I believe the woman would be at fault. Therefore, it's a false equivalence.

So, turns out Viz licensed the vastly superior manga. 4 volumes out and nobody told me. So there's finally a translation that's [probably] good.

That's unfortunate.

Do you believe conservatives should face social consequences for their actions? We also face social consequences for our actions. I'm saying to give them nothing but more blanks than Ginguy shot into his favorite sock at the stroke of midnight coming off last year's most harsh no-nut November. It's also very strange to make that comparison unless you think a school selling gun supplies would be acceptable.

Yes.

No.

You mean conservative values?

He's saying activism is bad because it makes the people it targets look bad. Alternatively:

Lol

They're going to shoot up that school anyway, so lets set up an ammo stand at the entrance.

I dunno, I prefer giving the 'fuck off, Ginguy' responses in the lowkey realm these days. Less "shut the fuck up" and more funny gif react, which can often come with its own backhanded jab.

It's not about their feelings. It's about going on the offense without debasing ourselves in the process. There's a difference between letting the message lie unaddressed and behaving like reasonable people so the unreasonable (Ginguy) do nothing but make themselves look bad. How can he bitch about people bullying him and crying about the angry leftist hate mob if the "hate mob" calmly lays out why he's wrong? He wants to be the Joker as a villain. But barely acknowledging him as more than the butt of a joke seems to have drastically diminished his posting capacity. 'Cause he's not coherent or principled enough to amount to anything more than a a sad, impotent joke when the retort is a simple deconstruction of his arguments.

I learned the hard way this doesn't work. Ginguy posts an awful lot of gafbage and he obviously can't be reasoned with, but the sanctity of Ginguy's fragile baby ego isn't the point. All Ginguy does is act like the drunk agitator on a bus. He wants to pick fights because when someone is shitty back he can play victim. That's how the right weaponizes behavior on the left. He can provoke all he wants but if people stick to the points of what he's saying, explain why they're wrong (and acknowledge the rare instances of him stumbling on being correct), then all he accomplishes by posting his transparent cruelty and gross smugness is looking like the asshole he is.

2027 - Sponges finally goes outside and discovers there is still a lawn. He reaches his hand out to it. His hand passes through the strands of grass as if nothing were there. In desperate shock, he pounces onto the ground, swatting at the grass like a cat to a laser pointer. After an hour long sob, he is struck with a realization: He wasn't wrong. All these years, they were wrong. He won. As it turns out he never could've touched grass.

I was referring to the people presently in power or Trump-era, though it was already transparently so during the Obama admin. Poor wording on my end.

It's @Ginguy's wet dream.

You say that as if the GOP ever had interest in governing.

All I know is the worst has got to be announcing season 3 of FLCL.

'Yo, only 1% of people have wasted as much time here as you!'

[Opens thread] [Nabs is seducing himself with incoherent yet horny fanfic]