you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

lol

12 hours ago, I defended another user by telling you:

Don't try to ban someone because he/she disagrees with you or others.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

You inauthentic asstroll, for the umpteenth time, it's not about disagreeing with you as a PROVEN LIAR, AUTHORITARIAN, and BIG PHARMA SHILL, it's also that you are a PROBLEMATIC DISRUPTIVE AGENT PERPETUALLY BREAKING THE FEW RULES of SaidIt.

THIS is a perfect example of how, as I'd stated, " They will of course cry /s/Victimhood, distort, spin, lie, deflect, and delay in all manner of ways. "

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Strike 1 for name calling. I'm sorry if you don't understand the rules here, but I'm done trying to explain them to you.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

Get the fuck out!?

I gave you a bunch of examples of ActuallyNot and Socks name-calling and you did NOTHING!

I intentionally name-called (it's not my normal modus operandi) to see if you'd actually do anything.

Your selective enforcement of the rules is getting ridiculously suspicious.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

I told you like a week ago that I gave socks a strike. He got another one within the last 3 days too, unrelated to interactions with you.

You and actuallynot going back and forth for 10 pages was a heated debate full of both actual arguments and rule breaking insults. Aka not clear rule breaking behavior.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for explaining. I still disagree.