>22482271
If you repeatedly posted the same theory here, wouldn't that be considered spam?
If one theory doesn't get across, don't you think it needs to be reformulated and proved in more detail?
I would to see your more detailed justification.
And what is your final point what you want to make.
Have you presented them clearly?
There is already a theory that submissions with CAPs only are the safest submissions.
Just trying to connect it to another occasion since it is so easy to delete a post.
This is not talking about complaints about the removal of spam.
I know.
That's why it's constructive to clarify what's going on, even for those who started here?
I am just embodying what I think is a constructive move.
Do you have a problem with me?
If you care so much about this post, why do you keep posting it where it will be erased?
Then why not continue to justify it in your own catalog?
Why do you keep posting the same thing over and over again, like spam, because it doesn't pass muster?
A kid having a tantrum?
I think adults are supposed to use words and information and provide clear explanations.
>22482427
Certainly at times there may be the possibility of being erased by the GV.
And have you tried them with your own catalog?
So where is that goodie screenshot of yours?
Please do not blame me for your inability to reply.
>22482458
I know.
It's just like a tennis rally.
You can't keep talking about things that contradict each other.
I'm in training trying to keep it as short as possible.
It's like looking for a critical hit.
If you can do that, the next time the same theory comes up again, it's easier to deal with it, right?