+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
was shopping earlier today, overheard a customer talking to an employee about "we'll do [idk what..] with the unvaccinated", both laughing.
shit is turning ugly quick and people don't even see it. it's amazing and frightening to watch.
i'm near the point of "fingers crossed for omicron hitting the vaccinated hard" to have the bullshit stop. maybe ADE is real after all.
sucks if people get ill of course, but if this general mood in the population continues we'll have good old lynchings next xmas :/
@bonifartius if you have the guts, go talk to those people and figure out what's up. Otherwise your "omg I crawled out of my cave and barely heard a voice for the first time in years and I'm scared" alarmist BS doesn't do anything but add fuel to whatever fires might or might not be burning. People lost close friends and family to this pandemic and you are here now wishing and praying "it hits them hard again". "awww it sucks for you, but I hope it happens again so you learn your lesson"(which is what exactly by the way? you tried you failed haha!), what a freaking hero!
@Eris thanks for enlightening us, point being? "I decree that nobody died last time, and I hope they die next time?" Or are you just jerking a knee.
@Eris can you even read? I just accepted your premise in the last message... please read...
@AR-15 oh no! did I break your heart by appearing dishonest my dear?
@Eris I'm so sorry I'm so broken, to be able to accept one's premise in an argument is a horrible mental illness I know. Thank you for your concern.
You condescendingly used a strawman version of my premise to argue against me.
That is not accepting the premise, it is rejecting it with extra steps.
Here's a hint: If you do not agree with a premise, you do not accept it.
Do you agree or disagree? Choose one, they are mutually exclusive.
@Eris learn english? @AR-15 @bonifartius
@AR-15 I don't care to be nice yo you, I'm sorry again if I heart your feelings, you can block me or mute me or whatever
Argue your point. Stop arguing about whether or not you're arguing. This is just silly.
@AR-15 If you want to see my argument it's in my reply to OP, and in my first reply to Eris. Past that it's Eris pretending that I'm arguing something I'm not arguing.
What is it that you are arguing then? Because you seem to think we're retarded and you clearly don't like us. I'm begging you, please say "my point is: ___." Stop doing this meta abstraction bullshit. It just makes you sound like you're hoping you'll make yourself sound smart (you're not) and confuse us into saying you were right, and it sounds like you're doubling down because you really don't want to have an actual argument, you just want to jelq your midwit IQ.
@AR-15 Here is a direct quotr from my reply to OP
> People lost close friends and family to this pandemic and
the thorn in all of your sides, that will torment you till the end of days... not let me blow your minds... simply remove it (the exactly text I pasted here) from my reply... the point still stands... if you can't see it all I can tell you is "learn to read", I'm sorry again for hurting your feelings
"Here is a vague allusion to what my point is and a condescending comment about how you are insufficiently smart to read my mind, rather than just a clear unambiguous statement of my position"
Stop doing this.
@Eris I wrote it down... do you want me to copy paste it here or something?
>do you want me to copy paste it here or something?
I want you to type a single sentence that clearly tells me what the fuck you are trying to say.
@Eris I did it in my first reply, and now also clarified that the thing you are so hung up on, is so inconsequential to it that you can literally remove it, can you do a basic edit, and re read it? Or will you keep playing dumb forever?
@AR-15 @bonifartius
> Or will you keep playing dumb forever?
Here's an idea: Assume I'm not playing, and just actually answer the questions I ask you
@Eris I answered all question you asked me to the best of my ability, I can't help that you refuse to read.
>I answered all question you asked me to the best of my ability,
I asked "Was there a pandemic, yes or no?" Four separate times and I still don't know your answer.
@Eris I'm telling you that in the context of the OP it is irrelevant, and I'm not here to satisfy your curiosity. You may have already inferred my disposition, that will suffice.
@AR-15 @bonifartius
>in the context of the OP it is irrelevant,
I have no clue what this means.
>and I'm not here to satisfy your curiosity.
When you join a discussion, you are here to satisfy the curiosity of others in the discussion. Tell us what you think so we can discuss it.
Otherwise why are you talking at all?
@Eris I replyied to OP to talk about the OP with the OPer. I reply to you to talk to you about how you can't read.
@AR-15 @bonifartius
@Eris no you can't read what I wrote, you can only read one quote I pointed out and asked to edit out, but since that's the only thing you can read, there is nothing left there afterwards for you, so you are confused now
> I pointed out and asked to edit out,
If we edit out the premise of your argument, then your argument is wrong.
@Eris It was not the premise. If you can't understand what I wrote at all I can't help you any further. Unless you have particular questions for me to clarify about what I wrote.
> If you can't understand what I wrote at all I can't help you any further.
Actually, if someone doesn't understand you, you CAN help, by doing this thing called "explaining your position more clearly."
Try it! You have literally nothing to lose but your pride!
>Unless you have particular questions for me to clarify about what I wrote.
I do, and have asked them.
Is/was there a pandemic, yes or no?
"People have died from this pandemic, therefore you wishing ill on vaxxers is wrong"
"IF you're so hung up on whether people died, just edit that part out!"
0 thought put into what you said
@AR-15 what are you even talking about? I reply to whomever I wish, whoever I wish as I have clarified here.
> I reply to whomever I wish, whoever I wish as I have clarified here.
Why do you not wish to reply reasonably to me?
@Eris my replies are very reasonable, you just can't read them, some sort of mental block @AR-15 @bonifartius
>did it hurt or did it not hurt? If I do it I do it unintentionally, that's why I apologize. I though you guys are thick skinned.
Condescending snark is not being reasonable.
@Eris look up the definitions of the words snark, condescending and reason...
It's really bizarre for someone to be so overtly snarky and then actually try to deny it.
@Eris I'm not denying I'm snarky. I'm saying it's not contradictory to reason. I must repeat, you really truly can't read anything I write do you?
@AR-15 @bonifartius
>I'm not denying I'm snarky
>look up the definitions of the words snark, condescending and reason...
The obvious implication of this snarky reply is that you are denying being snarky.
@Eris no you claimed I'm not reasonable because I'm snarky. I asked you to look up the definition, so that you at least realize that it is possible to be both snarky and reasonable and not at all to deny that I'm snarky.
> so that you at least realize that it is possible to be both snarky and reasonable
They are in fact mutually exclusive, and in this particular instance your snark is a method for avoiding being reasonable. It's your way of deflecting.
@Eris nice job not looking up the meanings of the words...
@Eris here I looked up the definition of snark for you
>an attitude or expression of mocking irreverence and sarcasm.
If you are honestly claiming that it is impossible to speak mockingly while also expressing reason, the I don't know if any examples can convince you. One would be when I say that you can't read, you obviously can read, I jest, what I'm expressing is that you are missing my point.
If they come upon one who still has not seen it and they speak to him of fire, he does not know what they mean. So they, in turn, fall back upon telling him what fire is like. As they do so, they know from their own experience that what they are telling him is not the truth, but only part of it. They know that this man will never know reality from their words, though all the words in the world are theirs to use. He must look upon the fire, smell of it, warm his hands by it, stare into its heart, or remain forever ignorant. Therefore, 'fire' does not matter, 'earth' and 'air' and 'water' do not matter. 'I' do not matter. No word matter. But man forgets reality and remembers words. The more words he remembers, the cleverer do his fellows esteem him. He looks upon the great transformations of the world, but he does not see them as they were seen when man looked upon reality for the first time. Their names come to his lips and he smiles as he tastes them, thinking he knows them in the naming. The thing that has never happened before is still happening. It is still a miracle. The great burning blossom squats, flowing, upon the limb of the world, excreting the ash of the world, and being none of these things I have named and at the same time all of them, and this is reality-the Nameless.
>You may have already inferred my disposition, that will suffice.
It will not.
I am asking you to tell me what you think.