#21 ·
Hey, multi-quote.
A judge can follow the letter of the law and still have an opinion. It’s not mutually exclusive.
The point is, beyond just being absurd, this whole theme has already been covered in unknown topics.
Do you actually think they’re clueless, or are you just messing with me? 🙄
The rules state this thread is for "everything and anything," which feels a bit narrow. Honestly, we could definitely expand that scope.
First off, there was zero smoking going on. As for everything else, it’s really not worth the effort of an intervention. How is anyone supposed to prove she's being malicious or spreading lies instead of just being wrong? And honestly, why does it even matter? The whole thing was just a comparison used to illustrate how you became who you are in her eyes. 🤷
Let’s assume the analogy holds some water, though I have my doubts.
Maybe Person C won't end up behind bars, but I honestly have my doubts about whether they should even be sitting on the bench as a judge.
A judge can follow the letter of the law and still have an opinion. It’s not mutually exclusive.
Just because I think things used to be better doesn't mean I'm saying everything today is total garbage (and seriously, does it always have to be "garbage"?). I don't see why claiming older music is better on average should be off-limits, even if that premise is completely wrong—which is something we should actually be debating over on the Music subreddit, not here.
The point is, beyond just being absurd, this whole theme has already been covered in unknown topics.
I’m not even sure you paraphrased that correctly, but I get the point you're trying to make. Look, it feels genuinely unnatural to me that someone claiming to be a die-hard alternative fan—especially with twenty years of mileage under their belt—wouldn't have even a vague idea of what a Sex Pistols, Black Flag, Butthole Surfers, or early Flaming Lips show actually looked like.
Do you actually think they’re clueless, or are you just messing with me? 🙄
First off, it might be a good idea to add an appropriate trigger warning to that thread.
Second, and more importantly, if this falls into that top 1% of bad behavior, we’re talking about total disregard for privacy. Doxing someone's life outside of Reddit without their consent—especially when the info is inaccurate and malicious—is just straight-up garbage.
The rules state this thread is for "everything and anything," which feels a bit narrow. Honestly, we could definitely expand that scope.
First off, there was zero smoking going on. As for everything else, it’s really not worth the effort of an intervention. How is anyone supposed to prove she's being malicious or spreading lies instead of just being wrong? And honestly, why does it even matter? The whole thing was just a comparison used to illustrate how you became who you are in her eyes. 🤷