Sociopath Community

AppleGenius said: 

Whorechata said:

Like I said, you called it out, I'm just pointing out that you failed to do that to the *other* emotional kid. If your thing is to shame inq about his use of emotional language and not legga it makes you seem a bit like a cunt with a particularly missc sized chip on your shoulder and using legga to have at them both. His whole schtick is that she's being mean without "knowing him" while he's not done anything in the way to get to know her either.

Which then makes my light teasing of her completely justified.

MissCommunication throws an emotional outburst at Legga for 20+ pages without knowing him. Legga then lightly teases MissCommunication about it for 2 posts, without knowing her. Former good, latter bad, because you.... don't respect me? Lol, okay.

I mean it's SC, do whatever. My thing here was TC calling out someone else for emotional language use and completely ignoring the op. As far as I know I don't think missC has made a thread dedicated to you and bashing you on it. I've been gone some time so I could be wrong.

Whorechata said:

He says in the way that she trash talks someone she doesn't know- but we all know legga- he just tends to hyper focus on Ed, inq and sensy, hyper focus enough that it leads to thoughts of paranoia where he assumes that anyone that agrees with with those he disagrees with must be an alt and/or completely fails to notice others properly. If this whole thread is leggas way of simply dismissing her entirely based on what people here can or cannot put into words then I guess tc is helping along with that, instead of having an actual conversation with the person.

It is impossible for me to make observations of MissCommunication because I have never talked with her, but not only is it possible for you to make observations of me, you *know* me. You've literally never talked with me. Way to practice double standards.

When MissCommunication throws an emotional outburst at me for 20+ pages for Inquirer whilst everyone ignores her, it's fine because she's a cheerful angel, but then I can't lightly tease her about it in this topic, because I'm Legga.

I've literally talked to you on your wolf alt, tried to have a normal conversation with you in chat and you got some type of mood and began calling me an alt to...idk? Is that trolling? But it's a thing with you, it's not like you're brand new member legga, your inability to remember other people and only get an impression of others because of how you interact with inq is super annoying. You made a statement about her, most people disagreed, you doubled down- tc (who does not like her) tries to egg you on.  No one is saying you can't do these things- this is just the outcome.

Whorechata said:

and I'm currently focusing on you, not really legga. I stopped focusing on legga a bit ago because he's got nothing more to offer other than "tell me why I should even try to get to know her" he's not even worth focusing on tbh

No, I never said that. Actually, I said `I will get to know her,` but thus far she hasn't wanted to get to know me. No wonder you have such negative opinions of me, it's because it's all make-believe for you and you don't actually read what I say.

I have negative opinions of because I've read what you've said.

Turncoat said:

Does someone else have to host the exact same topic for it to mean something to you, or would it remain incorrect simply because Legga hosted the query first? If Legga said gravity was real, would you just assume you could fly by merrit of how much Legga is not to be trusted?

It's because she doesn't actually listen to what I say now, or what I've said in the past. It's all make-believe.

You're both absolute babies, i borrow a thing tc does often when taking about other people he doesn't like

Whorechata said:

I am literally the stupidest fuck in this forum.

We shouldn't listen to Legga's arguments because of his credentials, basically ad-hominem and reputation heuristics. However, if we go by credentials (which I'm not proposing because I find it arrogant, but you are): You've admitted that you're literally the stupidest person on this forum, while I have a PhD and a faculty position in academia. How do you justify that people should listen to you over me, in your own world-view? You're literally the dumbest person on this forum, even by your own admission.

I don't remember saying to not to listen to your arguments because of your credentials. I said 'its Legga' if you and Tc suddenly filled in what I meant with your own ideas that on you.  The conversation being had with TC was on how I *pick my targets* with tc trying to explain away why I do certain things so that it would fit into the view he has of missC, just literally him carrot sticking me to get to a place where he can go "you see missc? Lena, like Inq also thinks you need to be protected because she agreed with me that she doesn't argue with people that can't protect themselves"

But unfortunately I don't like carrots and I value MissC.

I like MissC.

- we've got a couple things in common
- she likes my memes
- she is able to banter and keep up a conversation
- I haven't seen her act malicious 

I've skimmed thread and seen it being mentioned that one should talk with a person before judging, I think this is far and hence my above judgment holds value beyond mere observation. I think that plenty of (to some) seemingly shit members would end up getting a different view of the other eventually. I myself am an example of that. Then again I am just a chimpanzee. 

QuietBeef said: 

Whorechata said: 

QuietBeef said: 

Inquirer said: 

This is pretty pathetic. Did it hurt you this much to get teased by MissC and others during the debate? Is that why you refuse to do part 2?

Apart from whining about the debate there's very little substance in anything you say. It's just a lazy, baseless tirade. I do find it funny to see you call other people "dreary trolls" and that they "nauseatingly mirror and echo other people" though. Is it too presumptuous of me to assume this is not meant as self irony?

Inquirer to the rescue, as usual.  Why is it that you think MissComm is incapable of defending herself?

Why do you dislike inquirer defending her? They've been friends for a long time, is that not a normal response for a friend to have?

That depends on context. She's not the only person here that he's ever been friends with, but she is the only person he defends like this, which begs some questions. And he does it with such a consistency that I'd question it coming from anyone. He shows up pretty much any time someone criticizes her, and his standard response is "you just don't know her" or "she's not taking this seriously, but if she was...", which I think is telling for as much as it's a non-answer. This thread was a barrage of praise for her with pretty much just Legga criticizing her, but he still felt compelled to intervene. A similar example was when Alice wrote a post that was largely praise of MissComm, with only one minor addendum that she "doesn't contribute much to debate", and Inq showed up after about a month of complete absence just to say (paraphrasing) "you don't really know her and if she was taking it seriously she could debate you", and then he disappeared again for weeks. Obviously it's not concrete, but to me this paints a certain picture, especially in conjunction with the fact that he doesn't defend any of his other friends at all, even when it's opportune. It's not in his nature to do so.

I mean legga could have made a completely missC focused thread but instead he also dragged Inq into it so I still see his(inqs) responsea perfectly normal reaction? It's just weird that you and Tc have such a bone about who he does and doesn't defend so suddenly. Less suddenly with TC, he's just not liked her for some reason.

This could mean a number of things, but it falls pretty neatly into how I already viewed their dynamic from the peripheral experience of having been friends with Inq through all of it. In general, he's a person who feels compelled to cater to highly emotional people, particularly those who are immature or otherwise can't handle themselves in some way, and is intensified by their entitlement. He's been socially conditioned to respond to that sort of thing, the more overtly emotional and self-absorbed another person is, the more he compulsively panders to them to avoid stress. I've seen this behavior from him in multiple ways, not even just MissComm. And since I'd say that overemotionalism, immaturity, and a sense of entitlement in her feelings are defining characteristics of her, it makes perfect sense to me that her sensitivities are a sort of trigger for him. I've also seen this dynamic between them play out off SC a number of times too, it's become pretty old hat. Her attitude is very demanding of his support and he has a very hard time saying no and letting her stand on her own two feet. Frankly, I think their dynamic is toxic. And as his friend, yes, it absolutely does bother me that it is.

As a minor aside, I think that if he feels the need to arbitrarily validate her every time she's criticized, no matter how or why, he's just an enabler, stunting her from learning from her own behavior and the responses she gets to it.

I don't know inq well enough, he and I aren't friends but even then I would offer this sort of advice in private not in a public manner where you either force him to accept what you're saying here and basically have to sort this in a public display about his own character or force him to deny and not deal with it and make you feel a certain way if he has to address it in private. In either case you'll feel a certain way and have it over him. It's pretty shitty. 

If it was a toxic friendship that you're worried about, there was plenty of other was you could have gone about it 

Whorechata said: 

AppleGenius said: 

Which then makes my light teasing of her completely justified.

MissCommunication throws an emotional outburst at Legga for 20+ pages without knowing him. Legga then lightly teases MissCommunication about it for 2 posts, without knowing her. Former good, latter bad, because you.... don't respect me? Lol, okay.

I mean it's SC, do whatever.

Alright, thank you.

I've literally talked to you on your wolf alt, tried to have a normal conversation with you in chat and you got some type of mood and began calling me an alt to...idk? Is that trolling? But it's a thing with you, it's not like you're brand new member legga, your inability to remember other people and only get an impression of others because of how you interact with inq is super annoying. You made a statement about her, most people disagreed, you doubled down- tc (who does not like her) tries to egg you on.  No one is saying you can't do these things- this is just the outcome.

I disagree that most people disagreed with my statement, but it was already explained to you why. I also disagree that my impression of others is determined by my interactions with Inquirer. This is only your impression, because the only way you know me is through Inquirer. I've chatted with Alice, Turncoat, Edvard, Luna, Billy, Trypt, and... I won't list all of them; it's just shorter to summarize with "everyone else except you and perhaps MissCommunication," who suffer from the same problem.

I don't have anything against you, except that you're kind of obnoxious and dishonest.

I have negative opinions of because I've read what you've said.

Err, but if you look at the quote: `legga a bit ago because he's got nothing more to offer other than "tell me why I should even try to get to know her"` then that pretty clearly implies that you didn't read what I said. Since I never said that; I said pretty much the opposite.

Whorechata said:

I am literally the stupidest fuck in this forum.

We shouldn't listen to Legga's arguments because of his credentials, basically ad-hominem and reputation heuristics. However, if we go by credentials (which I'm not proposing because I find it arrogant, but you are): You've admitted that you're literally the stupidest person on this forum, while I have a PhD and a faculty position in academia. How do you justify that people should listen to you over me, in your own world-view? You're literally the dumbest person on this forum, even by your own admission.

I don't remember saying to not to listen to your arguments because of your credentials. I said 'its Legga' if you and Tc suddenly filled in what I meant with your own ideas that on you.  The conversation being had with TC was on how I *pick my targets* with tc trying to explain away why I do certain things so that it would fit into the view he has of missC, just literally him carrot sticking me to get to a place where he can go "you see missc? Lena, like Inq also thinks you need to be protected because she agreed with me that she doesn't argue with people that can't protect themselves"

But unfortunately I don't like carrots and I value MissC.

Well if you say it's Legga in that context, do you understand why people might understand this as "it's Legga, look at his reputation," and not "it's Legga, therefore I don't like carrots and I value MissC"?

And what did you mean?

Whorechata said: 

QuietBeef said: 

Whorechata said: 

QuietBeef said: 

Inquirer said: 

This is pretty pathetic. Did it hurt you this much to get teased by MissC and others during the debate? Is that why you refuse to do part 2?

Apart from whining about the debate there's very little substance in anything you say. It's just a lazy, baseless tirade. I do find it funny to see you call other people "dreary trolls" and that they "nauseatingly mirror and echo other people" though. Is it too presumptuous of me to assume this is not meant as self irony?

Inquirer to the rescue, as usual.  Why is it that you think MissComm is incapable of defending herself?

Why do you dislike inquirer defending her? They've been friends for a long time, is that not a normal response for a friend to have?

That depends on context. She's not the only person here that he's ever been friends with, but she is the only person he defends like this, which begs some questions. And he does it with such a consistency that I'd question it coming from anyone. He shows up pretty much any time someone criticizes her, and his standard response is "you just don't know her" or "she's not taking this seriously, but if she was...", which I think is telling for as much as it's a non-answer. This thread was a barrage of praise for her with pretty much just Legga criticizing her, but he still felt compelled to intervene. A similar example was when Alice wrote a post that was largely praise of MissComm, with only one minor addendum that she "doesn't contribute much to debate", and Inq showed up after about a month of complete absence just to say (paraphrasing) "you don't really know her and if she was taking it seriously she could debate you", and then he disappeared again for weeks. Obviously it's not concrete, but to me this paints a certain picture, especially in conjunction with the fact that he doesn't defend any of his other friends at all, even when it's opportune. It's not in his nature to do so.

I mean legga could have made a completely missC focused thread but instead he also dragged Inq into it so I still see his(inqs) responsea perfectly normal reaction? It's just weird that you and Tc have such a bone about who he does and doesn't defend so suddenly. Less suddenly with TC, he's just not liked her for some reason.

This could mean a number of things, but it falls pretty neatly into how I already viewed their dynamic from the peripheral experience of having been friends with Inq through all of it. In general, he's a person who feels compelled to cater to highly emotional people, particularly those who are immature or otherwise can't handle themselves in some way, and is intensified by their entitlement. He's been socially conditioned to respond to that sort of thing, the more overtly emotional and self-absorbed another person is, the more he compulsively panders to them to avoid stress. I've seen this behavior from him in multiple ways, not even just MissComm. And since I'd say that overemotionalism, immaturity, and a sense of entitlement in her feelings are defining characteristics of her, it makes perfect sense to me that her sensitivities are a sort of trigger for him. I've also seen this dynamic between them play out off SC a number of times too, it's become pretty old hat. Her attitude is very demanding of his support and he has a very hard time saying no and letting her stand on her own two feet. Frankly, I think their dynamic is toxic. And as his friend, yes, it absolutely does bother me that it is.

As a minor aside, I think that if he feels the need to arbitrarily validate her every time she's criticized, no matter how or why, he's just an enabler, stunting her from learning from her own behavior and the responses she gets to it.

I don't know inq well enough, he and I aren't friends but even then I would offer this sort of advice in private not in a public manner where you either force him to accept what you're saying here and basically have to sort this in a public display about his own character or force him to deny and not deal with it and make you feel a certain way if he has to address it in private. In either case you'll feel a certain way and have it over him. It's pretty shitty. 

If it was a toxic friendship that you're worried about, there was plenty of other was you could have gone about it 

I get what you're saying, but he and I have talked about this at length in private already, and he said he's okay with me publicly voicing my opinion about it.

Personally, I think that MissComm fabricating her relationship with him and then insisting that he'll back her up or say nothing, puts him in a much more unfair and awkward position.  If he comes on here and tells the truth, it will cause drama for them both, which she knows is something he doesn't want.  This is part of my issue with her.  I don't like the way she emotionally manipulates him, and this thread is a perfect example.  She puts him in a position of either having to hurt her, defend her, or stay silent and allow her to write his narrative for him.

I'm satisfied with the outcome. I disagree that most people disagreed with my statement, but it was already explained to you why. I also disagree that my impression of others is determined by my interactions with Inquirer. This is only your impression, because the only way you know me is through Inquirer. I've chatted with Alice, Turncoat, Edvard, Luna, Billy, Trypt, and... I won't list all of them; it's just shorter to summarize with "everyone else except you and perhaps MissCommunication," who suffer from the same problem.

I don't have anything against you, except that you're kind of obnoxious and dishonest.

I know you through Sensy and primal as well, i know you through Fae and your need to through out names immediately and put people into grouping as well but you're most known for having the theory that inq is Sensys alt- because of how incredibly weird and easy to debunk it is.

I have negative opinions of because I've read what you've said.

Err, but if you look at the quote: `legga a bit ago because he's got nothing more to offer other than "tell me why I should even try to get to know her"` then that pretty clearly implies that you didn't read what I said. Since I never said that; I said pretty much the opposite. 

>I will try to get to know her

>MissC why are you such a piece of garbage? (Jjk(or was I?))

Whorechata said:

I am literally the stupidest fuck in this forum.

We shouldn't listen to Legga's arguments because of his credentials, basically ad-hominem and reputation heuristics. However, if we go by credentials (which I'm not proposing because I find it arrogant, but you are): You've admitted that you're literally the stupidest person on this forum, while I have a PhD and a faculty position in academia. How do you justify that people should listen to you over me, in your own world-view? You're literally the dumbest person on this forum, even by your own admission.

I don't remember saying to not to listen to your arguments because of your credentials. I said 'its Legga' if you and Tc suddenly filled in what I meant with your own ideas that on you.  The conversation being had with TC was on how I *pick my targets* with tc trying to explain away why I do certain things so that it would fit into the view he has of missC, just literally him carrot sticking me to get to a place where he can go "you see missc? Lena, like Inq also thinks you need to be protected because she agreed with me that she doesn't argue with people that can't protect themselves"

But unfortunately I don't like carrots and I value MissC.

Well if you say it's Legga in that context, do you understand why people might understand this as "it's Legga, look at his reputation," and not "it's Legga, therefore I don't like carrots and I value MissC"? It might be difficult for you to understand if you're the dumbest person on SC even by your own admission, but try it out at least.

And what did you mean?

 No i don't understand why you would think that. I literally just said I borrowed a thing TC does. It's mean to make you fill it in yourself- it doesn't mean anything other than to make you feel like you need to defend yourself from whatever belief you yourself have slotted in there. 

QuietBeef said: 

Whorechata said: 

QuietBeef said: 

Whorechata said: 

QuietBeef said: 

Inquirer said: 

This is pretty pathetic. Did it hurt you this much to get teased by MissC and others during the debate? Is that why you refuse to do part 2?

Apart from whining about the debate there's very little substance in anything you say. It's just a lazy, baseless tirade. I do find it funny to see you call other people "dreary trolls" and that they "nauseatingly mirror and echo other people" though. Is it too presumptuous of me to assume this is not meant as self irony?

Inquirer to the rescue, as usual.  Why is it that you think MissComm is incapable of defending herself?

Why do you dislike inquirer defending her? They've been friends for a long time, is that not a normal response for a friend to have?

That depends on context. She's not the only person here that he's ever been friends with, but she is the only person he defends like this, which begs some questions. And he does it with such a consistency that I'd question it coming from anyone. He shows up pretty much any time someone criticizes her, and his standard response is "you just don't know her" or "she's not taking this seriously, but if she was...", which I think is telling for as much as it's a non-answer. This thread was a barrage of praise for her with pretty much just Legga criticizing her, but he still felt compelled to intervene. A similar example was when Alice wrote a post that was largely praise of MissComm, with only one minor addendum that she "doesn't contribute much to debate", and Inq showed up after about a month of complete absence just to say (paraphrasing) "you don't really know her and if she was taking it seriously she could debate you", and then he disappeared again for weeks. Obviously it's not concrete, but to me this paints a certain picture, especially in conjunction with the fact that he doesn't defend any of his other friends at all, even when it's opportune. It's not in his nature to do so.

I mean legga could have made a completely missC focused thread but instead he also dragged Inq into it so I still see his(inqs) responsea perfectly normal reaction? It's just weird that you and Tc have such a bone about who he does and doesn't defend so suddenly. Less suddenly with TC, he's just not liked her for some reason.

This could mean a number of things, but it falls pretty neatly into how I already viewed their dynamic from the peripheral experience of having been friends with Inq through all of it. In general, he's a person who feels compelled to cater to highly emotional people, particularly those who are immature or otherwise can't handle themselves in some way, and is intensified by their entitlement. He's been socially conditioned to respond to that sort of thing, the more overtly emotional and self-absorbed another person is, the more he compulsively panders to them to avoid stress. I've seen this behavior from him in multiple ways, not even just MissComm. And since I'd say that overemotionalism, immaturity, and a sense of entitlement in her feelings are defining characteristics of her, it makes perfect sense to me that her sensitivities are a sort of trigger for him. I've also seen this dynamic between them play out off SC a number of times too, it's become pretty old hat. Her attitude is very demanding of his support and he has a very hard time saying no and letting her stand on her own two feet. Frankly, I think their dynamic is toxic. And as his friend, yes, it absolutely does bother me that it is.

As a minor aside, I think that if he feels the need to arbitrarily validate her every time she's criticized, no matter how or why, he's just an enabler, stunting her from learning from her own behavior and the responses she gets to it.

I don't know inq well enough, he and I aren't friends but even then I would offer this sort of advice in private not in a public manner where you either force him to accept what you're saying here and basically have to sort this in a public display about his own character or force him to deny and not deal with it and make you feel a certain way if he has to address it in private. In either case you'll feel a certain way and have it over him. It's pretty shitty. 

If it was a toxic friendship that you're worried about, there was plenty of other was you could have gone about it 

I get what you're saying, but he and I have talked about this at length in private already, and he said he's okay with me publicly voicing my opinion about it.

Personally, I think that MissComm fabricating her relationship with him and then insisting that he'll back her up or say nothing, puts him in a much more unfair and awkward position.  If he comes on here and tells the truth, it will cause drama for them both, which she knows is something he doesn't want.  This is part of my issue with her.  I don't like the way she emotionally manipulates him, and this thread is a perfect example.  She puts him in a position of either having to hurt her, defend her, or stay silent and allow her to write his narrative for him.

 So you're gonna do the same thing that you don't like that she does to him? But it's okay in this case because you're a concerned friend? 

Whorechata said: 

QuietBeef said: 

Whorechata said: 

QuietBeef said: 

Whorechata said: 

QuietBeef said: 

Inquirer said: 

This is pretty pathetic. Did it hurt you this much to get teased by MissC and others during the debate? Is that why you refuse to do part 2?

Apart from whining about the debate there's very little substance in anything you say. It's just a lazy, baseless tirade. I do find it funny to see you call other people "dreary trolls" and that they "nauseatingly mirror and echo other people" though. Is it too presumptuous of me to assume this is not meant as self irony?

Inquirer to the rescue, as usual.  Why is it that you think MissComm is incapable of defending herself?

Why do you dislike inquirer defending her? They've been friends for a long time, is that not a normal response for a friend to have?

That depends on context. She's not the only person here that he's ever been friends with, but she is the only person he defends like this, which begs some questions. And he does it with such a consistency that I'd question it coming from anyone. He shows up pretty much any time someone criticizes her, and his standard response is "you just don't know her" or "she's not taking this seriously, but if she was...", which I think is telling for as much as it's a non-answer. This thread was a barrage of praise for her with pretty much just Legga criticizing her, but he still felt compelled to intervene. A similar example was when Alice wrote a post that was largely praise of MissComm, with only one minor addendum that she "doesn't contribute much to debate", and Inq showed up after about a month of complete absence just to say (paraphrasing) "you don't really know her and if she was taking it seriously she could debate you", and then he disappeared again for weeks. Obviously it's not concrete, but to me this paints a certain picture, especially in conjunction with the fact that he doesn't defend any of his other friends at all, even when it's opportune. It's not in his nature to do so.

I mean legga could have made a completely missC focused thread but instead he also dragged Inq into it so I still see his(inqs) responsea perfectly normal reaction? It's just weird that you and Tc have such a bone about who he does and doesn't defend so suddenly. Less suddenly with TC, he's just not liked her for some reason.

This could mean a number of things, but it falls pretty neatly into how I already viewed their dynamic from the peripheral experience of having been friends with Inq through all of it. In general, he's a person who feels compelled to cater to highly emotional people, particularly those who are immature or otherwise can't handle themselves in some way, and is intensified by their entitlement. He's been socially conditioned to respond to that sort of thing, the more overtly emotional and self-absorbed another person is, the more he compulsively panders to them to avoid stress. I've seen this behavior from him in multiple ways, not even just MissComm. And since I'd say that overemotionalism, immaturity, and a sense of entitlement in her feelings are defining characteristics of her, it makes perfect sense to me that her sensitivities are a sort of trigger for him. I've also seen this dynamic between them play out off SC a number of times too, it's become pretty old hat. Her attitude is very demanding of his support and he has a very hard time saying no and letting her stand on her own two feet. Frankly, I think their dynamic is toxic. And as his friend, yes, it absolutely does bother me that it is.

As a minor aside, I think that if he feels the need to arbitrarily validate her every time she's criticized, no matter how or why, he's just an enabler, stunting her from learning from her own behavior and the responses she gets to it.

I don't know inq well enough, he and I aren't friends but even then I would offer this sort of advice in private not in a public manner where you either force him to accept what you're saying here and basically have to sort this in a public display about his own character or force him to deny and not deal with it and make you feel a certain way if he has to address it in private. In either case you'll feel a certain way and have it over him. It's pretty shitty. 

If it was a toxic friendship that you're worried about, there was plenty of other was you could have gone about it 

I get what you're saying, but he and I have talked about this at length in private already, and he said he's okay with me publicly voicing my opinion about it.

Personally, I think that MissComm fabricating her relationship with him and then insisting that he'll back her up or say nothing, puts him in a much more unfair and awkward position.  If he comes on here and tells the truth, it will cause drama for them both, which she knows is something he doesn't want.  This is part of my issue with her.  I don't like the way she emotionally manipulates him, and this thread is a perfect example.  She puts him in a position of either having to hurt her, defend her, or stay silent and allow her to write his narrative for him.

 So you're gonna do the same thing that you don't like that she does to him? But it's okay in this case because you're a concerned friend? 

 I'm confused as to how you see it as the same thing.

Whorechata said: 

I know you through Sensy and primal as well, i know you through Fae

This is your make-believe fantasy again. Explain how you know me `through Sensy, Primal, and Fae.`

Err, but if you look at the quote: `legga a bit ago because he's got nothing more to offer other than "tell me why I should even try to get to know her"` then that pretty clearly implies that you didn't read what I said. Since I never said that; I said pretty much the opposite. 

>I will try to get to know her

>MissC why are you such a piece of garbage? (Jjk(or was I?))

Jesus, how sensitive can you be Whorechata. It's just a playful tease. I can't believe you insist that you're still right; can you quote where I said `tell me why I should even try to get to know her,` which is how you quoted me. How hard can it be to just admit you're wrong? I mean I didn't even mean for this to be a big deal or anything. 

No i don't understand why you would think that. I literally just said I borrowed a thing TC does. It's mean to make you fill it in yourself- it doesn't mean anything other than to make you feel like you need to defend yourself from whatever belief you yourself have slotted in there. 

No offense, but have you ever been diagnosed with autism or something?

On a second thought, this isn't worth it. I'm going to go make Christmas plans with my wife now and get some Christmas decorations, instead of spending my time arguing with someone like Whorechata.

I'm rather happy with the outcome already, especially over MissCommunication's attempts at looking mature, only to have herself be exposed over a sockpuppet.