you guys' love your hoaxes.
no one made sense of this yesterday
and today it still means nothing.
you know that the board has been honey paughted when you note
that no one even bothered to make a 'stuck ship' checkem, with the graphic of the container ship as the pointer of a checkem.
they don't even know what a checkem is.
three word post
a shill thing
the waters
trying to call a storm?
the whole 'we are with you' bullshit is bullshit.
anyone who is doing that is an operator and NTBT
not sure what you say here.
if you translate it I might have a response.
sounds like you are a boasting person trying to get a response.
not sure.
but what I do know is that you didn't provide anything other than a poke
it is helpful to point out and make obvious the methods of the shills and verminous inside the fence types.
in the morning if I'm too chatty usually the 'board problem' thing comes up.
if I shut up it goes away.
all your veiled threat bullshit doesn't go unnoticed either.
people think that they 'run' the board and say stuff like :
"and I thank you for willingly showing us."
all the anon can tell the difference between us.
the skeptic is especially correct when the beast makes its threats, anon.
if everyone were required to have a 'card'
then the requirement would be to 'show it' to
any random authority.
and it would show your preference.
and then the 'viewer' would have the preference as to what they could do.
you would be agreeing to allow them to discriminate against you based upon the random way that your card is configured.
and so if the 'vax' proves a deadly mistake suddenly the card makes the 'virtuous vax getter' the one who is excluded and hounded and treated like a savage or a criminal (the agreement that the person, upon viewing the card, can
RANDOMLY discriminate against you arbitrarily, and with mallice if that's there too.
why would anyone ever agree to such terms?
think it's limited honey paught now.
of course, I have no way to know.
and then a minute or two later I say 'that is ridiculous'
but here is the point: I feel not threatened.
the people doing it are looking for 'bad actors' and I'm a peaceful loving person so I have no worries.
you probably don't either.
I should say 'if there are people doing it then they would be . . .
because the subjunction ought to be used for conjecture, correct?
shitpost at will.
the subjuntive tense is used for conjecture.
it's like the keyboard is compromised and words are modified at the perverse urge of some overlordly process.
OK, then,
you sauce a single time, anytime, when 'they'
'came for' someone here.
and don't make it about sex.
five minutes later and you got nothing.