Entitled to what…?

Reminds me of OlliOlli World

I literaly never said you did

Yeah, no one should care about abuses of power if its only for 5 days!

Wow, absolutely fascinating. Love this guys vibe. Instant sub.

In summary, for the court:

Cowbee told a bold-faced lie about me:

you claimed nothing in the screenshotted text was bolded when it was.

This sealioning, gaslighting, and HYPOCRISY is surely ban worthy.

Just kidding, that would make you a PTB. :)

Lemmy.world is fine with political trolls and drama farming, though.

In your mind, sure.

This isn’t going to go anywhere, I’m disengaging.

After telling a bold-faced lie about me. Cool hypocrisy, bro.

You never conceded, you insulted me the entire way through

Not mutually exclusive. Stop whining about insults, you’ve insulted me this whole time as well. No one cares.

Was not an answer.

Yes it was. The answer is that Lemmy World wanted nothing to do with an instance obsessed with political rhetoric, that has identified them as housing enemy ideologies.

You can sub in any political ideology and that answer holds true.

Additionally, a single user saying I have a “reputation” after you displayed such bad-faith argumentation means very little.

Good thing there’s a whole community of users here. Man, you love fishing for little gotchas :)

Oh, yes – I did think you were a mod and the one that banned me, based on how things came to my inbox.

Nevermind, you’re just a Cowbee orbiter. Yawn.

No, you intentionally misinterpreted what I said by placing too much of a focus on the words “NATO” and “IMF” when the point was clearly about the line “It is in the Left’s interest for these organizations to be demolished.”

I didn’t “intentionally misinterpret” anything. I thought you were talking about that one line, and thought it was funny that you called out the only line without any actual bold in the formatting. I then said proceeded to move on and answer your question regardless of the perceived gaff.

When you decided that was your hill to die on, I gave you the concession because it was completely irrelevant to the discussion and invited you several times to engage with my answer. You refused.

I answered your question. 3 times. I linked you to it. What more do you want?

Now you’re here claiming that I said there was no bolded text at all. I see why other comments here are talking about your reputation.

Oh sorry, I assumed you used bans appropriately. My bad. Guess that sorta resolves this post though!

You could have said that @[email protected] worded it incorrectly, and that you never said that, you only said that a specific line wasn’t bolded (at least I assume that is what you are trying to get at here)

I literally conceded that he could have that point, because it was literally completely irrelevant to the discussion. I then invited him to rejoin the discussion multiple times after that, but he continued to accuse me of lying, instead of just agreeing to disagree and move on. Yet you deem my behavior as more harmful to the community.

Why are you both so fixated on that hyper-specific, non-sequitor?

You sure did. Quote the line I said.

You won’t. Because we were quibbling about which particular bullet point you meant, based on me making a non-sequitor jab.

You just can’t help but misrepresent, can you?

you claimed nothing in the screenshotted text was bolded when it was.

Quote me claiming “nothing in the screenshotted text was bolded” for the court please.

You’re right, will update now. Thanks, PTB

Removed by mod

You never had any points

Wrong.

and lied whenever I brought any up

Also wrong.

avoid answering my question on why they did that

Wow, wrong again. And again. And again.

You lied, even in face of photo evidence

Wrong too.

It’s dishonest, and is why there’s no point in arguing with points you raise because you won’t take any response seriously.

Cute grandstanding.

I’ve answered your question and invited you to respond to that answer several times now. But you’ve just continued to dodge. But sure, you’re the pinnacle of serious, honest debate.

Well you also ignored mine to fixate on which bullets were bolded, so there’s that! Big day!

You know what, you’re so hungry for it, I’ll concede this point. You were right, it should have been “your” not “you’re” those were were the ones that were highlighted.

I’ll put a little trophy right next to your username :)

Shows the bolding plain as day.

Sure does! And the bullet you mentioned about IMF, NATO, etc has no bolding. Even in the source!

Why this, the equivalent of me saying you made a typo, is the hill you want to die on is becoming clearer by the moment. :)