use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~5 users here now
The state of Reddit today. You knew this was coming.
submitted 2 years ago by Chipit from i.imgur.com
view the rest of the comments →
[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (5 children)
That is a disingenuous argument. Please avoid dragging down the discussion.
[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (4 children)
It's an observation. It's just bizarre to see people attempt this.
[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (3 children)
I showed no support for pedophiles, I questioned with your premise.
Your ad hominem attacks drag the conversation down the pyramid. I'm not debating with you on this, I'm informing you. It's got to stop. You're killing potential discussion instead of creating it.
[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (1 child)
It's not an ad hominem attack. An ad hominem attack is something like "you are an ass hat". Questioning the premise of the opponent is legitimate. It's bizarre that someone, upon seeing anti-pedophilia downvoted, would post a comment seeking to delegitimize it.
[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
Yes, I questioned your premise and what I said had nothing to do with supporting pedophilia whatsoever. Your argument is a fallacious one against me, not my argument.
I'm almost 100% positive the screen shot has taken out of context. I posted supporting evidence, a recent thread dealing with the topic of pedos that was not positive, and I searched for the comment posted but could not find it.
And your response is that I support pedophilia? That is nonsensical. More is expected from you than that here, and this is your heads up.
[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
😮
view the rest of the comments →
[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (5 children)
[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - (4 children)
[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (3 children)
[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - (1 child)
[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (0 children)