| pokoko said: And my "lol" was mocking your ridiculous statement that an 11 year old should not be held responsible for slurs or insults--which it now seems you stand behind. What's your problem, then? If you still believe that an 11 year old is not responsible for insults or slurs then we have nothing to talk about. If you're saying that you didn't mean that, then you're admitting that what you said was wrong. Nothing else to say, really.
|
But see, you know what's funny about that? I already explained all of this, including my viewpoint. My first clarification was the only one that was needed. But you kept going and tried to go back all the way to my original responses to pin me down. You wouldn't admit that you took me out of context, or misinterpreted (I don't know which it is now because at first I thought you accidentally did it but your replies made it seem more purposeful). Hell ... you wouldn't even admit what the definition of fallacious is! It took you this long because you didn't want to end it and say "Yeah I perceived your point wrong".
Of course I could have, and should have stopped earlier. That's a fault I have. But I think it's just hilarious that your reflection from all this is how simple it all is. Sure dude, so why did you make it convoluted?
Good day, and I hope our future arguments go smoother.
