Sociopath Community

Turncoat said: 

Wide-eyed shock and silence. 

Being more familiar with her they knew she had her temper building up (from Into the Spiderverse like wtf), but I don't think they expected someone to be kicked out over it. 

Seriously, that movie's just appropriated pop cultural trash with half of their story's threats stolen from Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. They couldn't even animate it with a good frame rate, and their fat older Peter Parker was very generic for the hand-me-down mentor role. Everything in that movie was expected, the music choices often didn't fit the scenes, the characters were too archetypal to the point of becoming two dimensional, it was just baaaaaaad.

lol. That's such a weird thing to be upset about.

Why Spatial in particular?

He was fresh in my mind as an object of your critical interest. There was no particular reason. Would you be willing to give a sample? I was curious that people seem more comfortable with your criticism IRL.

Seems like having it be about him would just bait him to flip out more.

What do you think @SpatialMind? Would you react negatively?

How do you think I would react?

Bitch said: 

Turncoat said: 

Wide-eyed shock and silence. 

Being more familiar with her they knew she had her temper building up (from Into the Spiderverse like wtf), but I don't think they expected someone to be kicked out over it. 

Seriously, that movie's just appropriated pop cultural trash with half of their story's threats stolen from Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. They couldn't even animate it with a good frame rate, and their fat older Peter Parker was very generic for the hand-me-down mentor role. Everything in that movie was expected, the music choices often didn't fit the scenes, the characters were too archetypal to the point of becoming two dimensional, it was just baaaaaaad.

lol. That's such a weird thing to be upset about.

It was transference over the stress she'd gone through at her day job, but I never expected that movie to be the straw to break anyone's back. 

Why Spatial in particular?

He was fresh in my mind as an object of your critical interest. There was no particular reason. Would you be willing to give a sample? I was curious that people seem more comfortable with your criticism IRL.

Seems like having it be about him would just bait him to flip out more.

What do you think @SpatialMind? Would you react negatively?

He won't answer you unless I lampshade like this that he wouldn't. 

Turncoat said: 

There's not enough information for that, the question in this case is irrelevant. There's otherwise just as much to work with here to explain both answers when it comes to hunches.

The example illustrates how easy it is to jump into conclusions.

I was tested for something like that by clinicians, and they found my inability to invent a scenario based on a nondescript picture frustrating. 

There really wasn't enough info to go by.

That then has the question of what qualifies as proof and how much of it you'd need, and by the end of it you're completely barred from airing out supposition, hunches, and how things otherwise appear to be. I have spent time linking tons of quotes to show patterns but at the end of the day they just reply with "You don't know me", so the question would become where the line is drawn for treating something as proof rather than an implicative quote.

What would be a concrete example of this? I am curious.

I get how it'd have to be that way for something official as to keep them on task, but that's not as realistic for the social tier.

I follow the philosophy of the US judicial system in my criticism. Would you believe me if I said it helps me with forming objective assessments?

I'm more finding it easier to state how 'People' in similar circumstances react to it, rather than saying it's about them. This tends to have them instead compare their own reaction to that of 'People', rather than feeling quite as defensive over how their construct belief of self feels under attack.

Do you mean judging actions as opposed to judging people?

Turncoat said: 

He won't answer you unless I lampshade like this that he wouldn't.

Just noticed I missed a question: 

Bitch said: 

Turncoat said: 

I see convenience out of holding back anyway, but not really value. It's good for the workplace anyway, and sometimes someone really isn't ready to hear the thing, but I figure that bar's set in more realistic zones than how it typically is displayed on this forum. 

What about people with low self confidence? Would you hold back if you dealt with someone like that?

Bitch said: 

Turncoat said: 

There's not enough information for that, the question in this case is irrelevant. There's otherwise just as much to work with here to explain both answers when it comes to hunches.

Now that you know the principle, do you often consider the what you see is all there is principle in your criticism of others?

The example illustrates how easy it is to jump into conclusions.

I was tested for something like that by clinicians, and they found my inability to invent a scenario based on a nondescript picture frustrating. 

There really wasn't enough info to go by.

Why did they want you to invent a scenario based on a nondescript picture? Was this with a shrink?

That then has the question of what qualifies as proof and how much of it you'd need, and by the end of it you're completely barred from airing out supposition, hunches, and how things otherwise appear to be. I have spent time linking tons of quotes to show patterns but at the end of the day they just reply with "You don't know me", so the question would become where the line is drawn for treating something as proof rather than an implicative quote.

What would be a concrete example of this? I am curious.

Now when you say "concrete", I can't help but feel that the word'll be used to push for more and more digging with you in the position of always being able to say "I'd need more".

There is otherwise no standard for establishing what is and isn't concrete beyond your opinion as things stand now, and that's a surprisingly common trap people try to play here: The 'If I don't believe it then they're either wrong or need to work harder' angle where they can sit there and just say 'Nah, try again' repeatedly, yielding overtime how much more and more it's not about proof, but rather about feeling convinced. 

I get how it'd have to be that way for something official as to keep them on task, but that's not as realistic for the social tier.

I follow the philosophy of the US judicial system in my criticism. Would you believe me if I said it helps me with forming objective assessments?

I'd think that it'd inhibit you from saying like 80% of what's really on your mind, and that it'd offer challenges when it comes to proving something someone else hasn't already proven for you. There has to be a range of half-baked ideas that have enough going for them to eventually stumble upon if not become with more information fully baked ones, but in such cases it's better to err on words like "think" or "feel" rather than "know". 

I'm more finding it easier to state how 'People' in similar circumstances react to it, rather than saying it's about them. This tends to have them instead compare their own reaction to that of 'People', rather than feeling quite as defensive over how their construct belief of self feels under attack.

Do you mean judging actions as opposed to judging people?

No, I mean literally referring to their own mistakes in the third person layman to force them to look at it without feeling like it's about themselves. 

Bitch said: 

Turncoat said: 

Wide-eyed shock and silence. 

Being more familiar with her they knew she had her temper building up (from Into the Spiderverse like wtf), but I don't think they expected someone to be kicked out over it. 

Seriously, that movie's just appropriated pop cultural trash with half of their story's threats stolen from Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. They couldn't even animate it with a good frame rate, and their fat older Peter Parker was very generic for the hand-me-down mentor role. Everything in that movie was expected, the music choices often didn't fit the scenes, the characters were too archetypal to the point of becoming two dimensional, it was just baaaaaaad.

lol. That's such a weird thing to be upset about.

 

Why Spatial in particular?

He was fresh in my mind as an object of your critical interest. There was no particular reason. Would you be willing to give a sample? I was curious that people seem more comfortable with your criticism IRL.

Seems like having it be about him would just bait him to flip out more.

What do you think @SpatialMind? Would you react negatively?

How do you think I would react?

 I'm mostly indifferent to what TC has to say about me really. There are reasons for that. But I dislike it when he tells lies about me, or rather when people buy into lies.

Here's the truth. Everyone that's been seeing me around here doesn't agree with TC's claims that I've doxxed and hurt people over the years.

I never appreciated being doxed and bullied, so why the hell would I do that to others ? Especially when I myself am vulnerable ? Such idiocy.

When asked who did I dox, TC will refuse to answer that question publically. People like that keep their false gossip underground.

What's clear is TC claims about me are a projection of the things he's done. Over the years we've seen him dox, harass, and turn on his comrades. He was still working for Luna when he wrote pages on kiwifarms to dox and bully Luna. They laughed and ridiculed Luna while TC provided pictures and Luna's social media.

His Kiwifarms entry is still there. The pictures he provided Kiwifarms aren't even Luna, it's some girl Luna used to catfish us.

.

Am I flipping out and losing my cool ? Hell no. I just have things to say.

Some would say I'm being arrogant or conceited or some narcissist, but does it really surprise anyone that I have more blessings in life, than our subject ? I wouldn't want our roles reversed, and I don't have the capacity to donate much time to TC anymore. I want real substance, but that's too much to ask for when it comes to that guy.

Spatial, dear god, we know your version already you say it the same way every time. 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial, dear god, we know your version already you say it the same way every time. 

 I absolutely say it the same everytime. And to be clear, it's not just my vision, nor is it based on hearsay, like your envious lies.

Canary said: 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial, dear god, we know your version already you say it the same way every time. 

 I absolutely say it the same everytime. And to be clear, it's not just my vision, nor is it based on hearsay, like your envious lies.

You're hopeless.