Is that actually the case? You used the format of quoting individual passages in order to “beat” them phrase by phrase instead of answering the post as a whole, where as I choose subjects worth discussing further.
The difference is a post that builds into a whole point can stand on its own where as nit picking simply leads to back and forth argumentation that never reaches any conclusion because it’s more about fighting than it’s about actually making an intellectual point.
Care to read my post above? Unnamed started as being entirely reasonable and was constantly under attack by Lucky. Lucky chose to ignore anything that was said and chose to attack Unnamed instead. Some people are so emotionally invested they start seeing enemies where there are none and by that point there is no talking to them.
Svvedish is right. 
This still changes nothing.
and you think you must tell people how they think?
thats pretty high and mighty tbh.
yeah but the thing about that is these people arent racist or homophobic. they may say something you deem to be homophobic and they deem to be a realistic, but at the end of they day they arent homophobic.
yes.
It did not win in their favor in all honesty.
only after it went to the supreme court did it fall in favor of the bakers. And even then all that did was drop it back down to the lower rings, or the ninth circuit or whatever.
and imo, I can understan exactly why they did this. Youtube is a new platform and these youtubers are essentially uniting and grouping up like minded people. and one could argue to be perfect grounds for tribalism. And so, these youtubers and their community, mostly their united community, is more or less the direct result of a large portion of the Twitter hate mob who has outright gotten people killed already. that one adult actor who stated that she has a preference into who she sleeps with on camera garnered so much hate against her for simply stating her preference to the point she killed herself.
So yeah, imo, breaking this community up in any way would be the best direction imo.
imo, people should have the right to refuse anyone for any reason but should be prepared for the outcome of such a refusal.
why do I have to respect random people?
Im not going and attacking them, and im not calling them master and listening to their every wish.
Im treating them neutrally and if you’re going to whine about teh majority being the majority and how the majority gets appealed to a majority amount of time then I would you should step back and learn how statistics in math work and do a bit more work in terms of research in how advertisement works as well.
also saying “imma flag you” is ban worthy.
I’m intentionally cutting off your post exactly there because it’s actually something I vastly agree with. It’s called a “majority privilege” (which many people for instance mistake as “white privilege” in America). And there are always going to be advantages to being part of the majority.
I never said it’s a bad thing—but to people who try and proclaim they understand LGBT issues, they first need to understand that they are part of the majority and the world of the minority is different. A simple metaphor of this concept:
The point in that statement was that things that aren’t an issue to you might be an issue to someone else because they’re not the same as you. Saying “just change your voice” might not be the kind of solution that’s actually ideal because it’s part of a person’s identity and you’re asking them to forfeit that identity so that the “eagles” don’t have to be concerned about the “owl.”
Connie also has great points here.
I honestly don’t care if you were “attacked” by another poster. Quotations mark here because there was some legit points made against you and you repeated the behavior I described by labeling it “attacks” instead of actually addressing the points made against you.
If I were to adapt your behavior, I would simply dismiss everything you said from here on out as an attack and twist everything you said into some form of offense.
You also again repeatedly demonstrate the inability to accurately answer the point made against you by just quoting another poster on an entirely different context.
People who struggle to hold their own in an argument often lash on to whatever support they can get as evidence that they are right instead of just articulating arguments for why they are right.
Apologies but I must have missed something… What was the point that Unnamed did not answer?
That’s a straw man. If you want to throw an accusation, show me where and how instead of inventing your own fiction of how I told you what to think.
That’s what I said, ConnieAmore. It’s 100% spot on. And yes, I think it’s wrong to constantly call people who disagree with you homophobes and completely understand why this is a tendency that people are getting sick of.
Because the code of conduct states that you cannot insult people and telling me that my long elaborate statements are “whining” is an insult.
its only a strawman if you think the saying “you can lead a horse to water but you cant make it drink” to be a facetious statement. No one likes the “truth” being shoved onto them and forced to consume. It drives people away from what is truth and makes people think you’re simply insulting them.
yes, and i wrote yes when you said this to indicate agreement.
they werent elaborate. I was stating that complaining about how the people that want money appeal to the biggest group of people and thus have the most money is dumb.
People want money
So they appeal to the biggest group
To get the most money
Albeit their advertisements are bad imo. And they should put more focus in putting more effort into design/making better items.
To avoid a whole mass of quotation text walls, I’ll use post numbers.
Post 214: Unnamed splits the post into two different quotes, responding to them individually out of context ignoring the point they were forming as a whole. As such, he’s avoiding having to address the correlation between being part of the majority and asking a minority to act like the majority.
Post 218-220: Instead of answering the point regarding his argumentation method tending to ignore points against him, Unnamed once again ignores the statement by instead blaming the poster with a baseless accusation about “cherry picking” without providing any substance to the accusation.
Post 227: Unnamed ignores the building point answering his question regarding why “everyone twists his words” and tries to quote another poster on another subject as a means to say “this guy thinks I’m right” instead of just addressing the point made against him. Said poster then jumps into the debate ignoring the context as well.
So you’re saying
Y’all mass flagged the OP
Enough to get it hidden
For relaying a story that’s relevant to the game
Without violating the CoC
That’s what you’re saying?
That’s shameful. I’m appalled that your hatred for LGBT threads runs this far. You all should know to separate this from those.
So you can’t tell people the truth cos they won’t like it and will refuse to believe it? What kind of logic is this?
Oh look, another victim …
more like go to jail for saying it.
In United Kingistan
not in the usa, also my post was sarcastic because of how totalitarian most of Europe and the UK is as of late.
I’m pretty sure no one goes to jail for saying the truth. Facts and truth aren’t something people tend to get imprisoned for. Hateful opinions and falsehoods? Yes. Truth? No.
You realize some of us spent a good portion of our lives over in the middle east fighting? Don’t expect us to exactly trust that.
That is a straw man. You literally described leading a point to something it’s not, the only difference being that you think it’s a likely probability where I don’t think it is. But let’s not dive too deep into the semantics of things. We are mostly in agreement.
Given that the word is subjective I’ll give it to you that you can choose not to call my posts elaborate, but I still tend to put a lot more effort into the wording of my posts and explain my points carefully and respectfully (at least to some degree).
Calling them “whining” is still degrading and it hints that you don’t want to own up to what you said. Do you honestly want to defend the point that my posting is the equivalent of “long, high-pitched complaining cries”?
Thank you, very well stated.
That’s what they said? Like… that’s it? How about “ur stupid”? Or “shut up dummy”?
Buddy, these were bottom of the barrel, generic statements. Based on the fact you got offended by this leads me to believe the above statement is completely false. I was gonna suggest you had a low tolerance for insults, but I don’t think this counts as tolerance at all.
I’ve seen some truly awful things said about gay people, I’ve had worse things said to me as a straight guy.
Grow a backbone, or does that offend you too?