EatATaco

I have votes turned off. Have they actually been downvoting me?

First we start with the classic “No, you stop”

No, please don't stop. It's hilarious how long you've gone while at the same time repeatedly stating how boring it. lol Who does that? Eventually I'll bore of watching this desperate attempt to win by getting the last word in, and then I'll just leave. This is how people who don't have to get the last word in act. But for now it's some good entertainment throughout the day.

Obviously you enjoy this stupidity, so it could go on for days

Well, you don't enjoy it, as you've repeatedly called it boring, and yet you seemingly can't just walk away. It's like you want to make it extremely obvious that your "you have to get the last word in!" is just a massive projection.

So now you complain that I respond to you?

No, not at all. I'm quite enjoying this. It's very entertaining watching your flail around.

Because, in your world if you have the last say you win! A ridiculous notion but there you are.

You've, multiple times, tried to get me to stop posting, when all you've had to do was stop responding to me; this is your most obvious projection yet.

And also sorry you feel “bad”,

You've intentionally and directly insulted me numerous times. It's obvious you want me to feel bad. Why pretend it's not your goal?

You sure do spend a lot of time trying to make me feel bad, for someone who supposedly doesn't care what I think.

In fact, by your own metric, the amount of times you've responded reveals strong feelings on the matter. Or do you not realize that that was an obvious projection?

There's little more pretentious than believing that simply because a person doesn't have some arbitrary amount of training, that they don't possess useful knowledge that you can learn from them.

As you continually make more and more clear, your strong suit seems to be projection.

Thanks, I appreciate it. You might even be able to learn from the nice things I do for myself.

It's not. I get it now. I'm just pointing out that the confusion was the result of their unrelated comment, rather than their accusation that I "want" it to imply something. I'm explaining what caused the confusion.

Life advice: when I find something boring I stop doing it and find something else to do. I don't continue to do it while announcing to the world how bored I am of it.

You know you could have just left when you originally abandoned the point. But I can see you have strong feelings on the matter, if nothing else from your continuing response.

How strong my feelings are about the topic have nothing to do with the point. It's interesting, however, that you are trying to make this about me rather than the point. That just tells me you realize I've made a good point, but don't want to admit it.

The grain of salt but was directly tied to interviewing citizens affected by the disaster

Except the only one that was interviewed who could be considered a victim is Kemp. Which is where the confusion came from. If you are saying that victims statements should be taken with a grain of salt, and in the context there is one victim, then it sounds like you are showing some doubt about what they are saying.

Im reading your post in the context of the article. The only one who they got a comment from that could be considered a victim is Kemp, and you said they should be taken "with a grain of salt." It now appears your post had nothing to do with the article, but just disasters in general.

It has nothing to do with me wanting anything, but you talking about some kind of unrelated and that causing confusion.