Damn. Obviously I can tell you don't give a damn what I think, but I gotta say that is just a shameful way to respond to someone that is seemingly speaking in good faith. I don't like the results any more than the next guy but I just know that reflexively making enemies of people that say the slightest thing you don't like to hear is either a sign of real antisocial underpinnings, or just plain old weakness. Either way it's not the kind of bearing that inspires credibility. Which is what is needed in ANY movement that involves the dissemination of "truth".
It just sucks when someone gets labelled "You Hobbs motherfuckers" apparently for no reason other than lack of absolute and vocal spewing venom and hate about it. Some people put that energy into maintaining sober focus and reappraising evidence and plans. The guy you responded to has insite that is useful moving forward. And didn't needlessly alienate valuable allies.
I realize you won't be able to see this as constructive criticism, but I hope you learn how to be part of a cohesive group of like-minded individuals that may have different perspectives.
Merry Christmas you old salty Anon. I think you are valuable.
So why do I think Im full on praying she continues to present better and better evidence and hope she ultimately prevails? Seems like that's the essence of someone that is exactly not what you are trying to convince me of. Brother, are just hateful? I genuinely think we are on the same side but you are suspiciously against your own teammates. Don't be like that. Hate be cloudin your judgement. Be cool.
And fwiw, I didn't pick up on the bad faith. I think if I hadn't seen you flip so hard and fast to judgement, I would maybe believe you right off. But the credibility isn't what it could have been. And I'm being sincere about this. Again, I bet you don't care. But I hope you do. We need smart anons more than just angry ones. Imo
Damn. Obviously I can tell you don't give a damn what I think, but I gotta say that is just a shameful way to respond to someone that is seemingly speaking in good faith. I don't like the results any more than the next guy but I just know that reflexively making enemies of people that say the slightest thing you don't like to hear is either a sign of real antisocial underpinnings, or just plain old weakness. Either way it's not the kind of bearing that inspires credibility. Which is what is needed in ANY movement that involves the dissemination of "truth".
It just sucks when someone gets labelled "You Hobbs motherfuckers" apparently for no reason other than lack of absolute and vocal spewing venom and hate about it. Some people put that energy into maintaining sober focus and reappraising evidence and plans. The guy you responded to has insite that is useful moving forward. And didn't needlessly alienate valuable allies.
I realize you won't be able to see this as constructive criticism, but I hope you learn how to be part of a cohesive group of like-minded individuals that may have different perspectives.
Merry Christmas you old salty Anon. I think you are valuable.
So why do I think Im full on praying she continues to present better and better evidence and hope she ultimately prevails? Seems like that's the essence of someone that is exactly not what you are trying to convince me of. Brother, are just hateful? I genuinely think we are on the same side but you are suspiciously against your own teammates. Don't be like that. Hate be cloudin your judgement. Be cool.
And fwiw, I didn't pick up on the bad faith. I think if I hadn't seen you flip so hard and fast to judgement, I would maybe believe you right off. But the credibility isn't what it could have been. And I'm being sincere about this. Again, I bet you don't care. But I hope you do. We need smart anons more than just angry ones. Imo
can't present new evidence in appeal, what she showed is all she can ever use in appeal process.
Well right on, brother. We'll graduate from HS and go on to prevail. Acting or not, WWG1WGA.
Merry Christmas