Depends on the content that is missing, doesn't it?
Yes it really does. spam by definition requires the content to not be wanted and useful and genuine. Just because you rarely see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. You do not get to cognitively shortcut and not think about the content. Could have been a massive drop for example. Stop thinking religiously anti-spam with no cause.
I have seen individuals post 60+ times per bread.
I have seen automation of posts.
I have seen information take multiple posts.
I have seen people prepared to drop ahead of time.
These facts alone should be enough to disspell your logic. Yes, it is just a possibility, but that's enough to deny your erroneous logic. That's why I call your thinking religiously. You're willing to call content that may have existed surely spam based on what, a hunch? A hunch that 'is super rare guyz', it's not super rare, so….
I'm not arguing that it's true. You might want to work on logic, because you need it to make declarations based on your feels. Don't change the subject just because I'm correct in my argumentation that your assertion that 'surely it's by definition spam' is simply correctly calling bullshit on that.
to not make declarations*
That one could not say that 'by definition (of post count) that it was assuredly spam' was my answering of the question whether one could do so.
You sure don't want to question your own logic, instead falsely saying I'm saying pro-argumentation. You suck at logic and you suck at argumentation. Enjoy making bullshit definitions for words in lieu of the actual ones. You do not get to ignore what the word means. It still depends on the content and whether it was wanted. Period. Stop being a fagoot and redirecting the argument and start going "ah shit I guess the answer to the question I asked is opposite of what I expected, also I am F&G"
>You asked a question, and I answered directly and fully.
It must suck to get exactly what you wanted.
5:5
kek does what kek does. is easily gameamble here anyway
Yeah well she got cheated on, too. Sooooooo…
head scratch
2 deletions or 2 deletions of all posts by id?
No I wasn't actually, I was asleep and that's why I have advanced no argumentations towards definitiveness either way. I was in 03, woke up and it was 05. But you'll note I'm not saying ridiculous bullshit like "assuredly all the posts I've not seen was definitionally spam right?" Because for one thing no it isn't by definition spam as I contend it depends of their content. You would think this would be easily overcome but nah, always gotta fight really hard to get basic logic agreed upon.
Good, I'm glad you did some checking it out. He asked a fucking question and I answered it directly and honestly. Why do you idiots think I would mind your work on a different question? >Because you cannot logic.
Then how about you address the actual point arguing, that'd be great, retard. You don't get to strawman. I've been completely honest about my limitations wrt YOUR pro-arguments and have not addressed because I cannot. Yet you morons would never dare to admit the retardation in asking for and getting an answer, logically and correct, that you have to play a bait and switch tactic. Oh wow well done, except I do not care which way that separate debate goes. It makes no difference to me.
Jews always gotta pretend they didn't say something completely dumb, and got correctly called out on it.