>>18729803 (pb)
you've been here for years?
then you know that when you discuss 'muh feels' you always have to face some anon either ridiculing you or questioning your motives.
>>18729836 (pb)
that was brevity for someone who thinks and writes and describes the real world.
were you the one who is on a 'tolerance break'?
I asked you to define it, but you never did.
ah, the gas lighter persona.
iP hops, never answers questions
and when it responds claims that it did answer, when it did not.
you should take your own advice.
what this one is doing now is badgering.
fortunatly I've studied the metods of these people long enough to not let it effect me emotionally.
soon it will say that it does and use words of emotional distress, in a terse way, to describe what it claims I feel, not having any idea at all.
when that doesn't it work it often gets to a 'you are stupid' presentation.
the
"nothing you do is good enough ever " tactic didn't work, so it has to try something else to try and get under my skin.
it will say
"2 much text" probably next.
a 'high-atis?'
maybe he's not speaking in metaphorical terms.
those morbidly obese guys and do you a lot of damage if they come charging up and knock right into you.
Rethoric is important, understanding tactics is too.
the only danger is that if you give a Rethoric on bad tactics, some people will use it as a guide.
if you don't like it, don't read it.
but don't do the 'nothing you do is ever good enough' bit, OK.
still chasing after the wind and trying to cause emotional distress?
why, anon, why?
now I'm going to go cry for a while.
Oh Lulubelle, why? sob sob.
was that the effect you were looking for?
it's a scene from 'That Seventies show, but I don't remember the name'
I haven't read this yet but I suspect this is relevant based upon the headline.
https://en.mercopress.com/2023/04/21/chile-announces-national-lithium-strategy
a tasteless joke:
maybe they will need to prove it in a private session with someone from the DHS office . . .
Wikipedia doesn't really say that.
they would call that kind of thing, back then, by a different term: 'espionage'
not me, anon.
I'm not a shill. I do something do a rhetorical analysis of tactics here as way of tracking the and obviating the methods of those who seek to subvert the board.
If that seems 'shilly' then I'm a shill for not using rhetoric in a way that dehumanizes people.
the leaker will have a new hearing, in Worcester next Thursday (the day of the NH rally for President Trump)
https://www.bostonherald.com/2023/04/21/new-detention-hearing-scheduled-for-massachusetts-air-national-guardsman-charged-with-leaking-military-secrets/
https://www.bostonherald.com/2023/04/20/developers-have-right-to-finish-1b-power-line-jury-says/
high tension wires through the wilderness of Maine to proceed as the Green Energy czars have won their lawsuit.