I edited it to make it more clear.
Also, if you click the "In Reply To" portion, it'll reload the page with the relevant post darkened.
" I've choke slammed a list of women here and got away with it, cause it was me replying to efforts against me."
ok, 'getting away with it' implies you were doing something wrong, which wouldn't be the case if you were defending yourself. and why do you only seem to be boasting about doing it to women? do you think you react harsher toward females? you seem angrier at haart than ed which makes little to no sense..
At this hour, I'm too exhausted to write a million lines of code for yet another failed attempted to fix you.
What's interesting is that thing you have for Whoameye and myself sharing a piece of mind.
I understand you're insinuating that he's being predatory by baiting me with words I'd like to hear, and I'm just eating it up.
I'm falling asleep.
"The wiser you are though, the more you'll find yourself sitting back and watching some learn the hard way, despite any warnings you may provide."
whether he's parroting something else he heard or he truly understands this..that was what i found to be accurate. for all his waffle he sometimes hits the nail on the head. obviously he's being ridiculous about haart, i wish i had seen their conversation so i could try to pinpoint exactly where this conflict was triggered.
"When the subject of truth came about, you said "Everyone chooses the facts." Delusion is the way of you."
Everyone's delusional somewhere, and we will never reach that 100% when it comes to the pursuit of proof. People instead are stuck with answers that are "close enough" at best, and many accept answers that aren't even that far. You can't prove that truth is true, for there is always the potential for more external layers, more elements of what it could really mean. We are assumptive at best.
In some cases, it takes someone with experience in delusion to think far enough outside of the box, or have lead a different enough life, to stumble upon ideas no sane person would ever find. It's a form of experience.
"For example, you threatened to jump in front of a car."
I ask for examples related to the "intervention" as you called it, figuring you meant from something from within this topic, and instead you go back to that one, lone example. If your entire case is built on that then you don't have much of anything, which says something when I am prone to willingly handing away ammo.
"Smoke and Motor were the only ones to take a poke at straightening you out, while the others just enabled you. I imagine you'd reckon Smoke and Motor weren't as good for your mental health as those who ignore your delusions."
I... don't think they were trying to straighten me out, and I don't think those who say otherwise are there to enable and ignore delusions. To even call it delusions in this case is to deny philosophies that you don't agree with by labeling it as such. I imagine that the range of what you'd call a "delusion" is much wider than most people's from being the victim of your own rigid views.
This sounds more like the sort of thing you wish to believe to be the case. It fits into your expected narrative style: Defining a binary system of sides, and then aiming to discredit whoever you think is the flagship of the other side and turn the rest on said opponent's side into some sort of conspiracy (ex: bandwagon). Whenever it comes to antagonistic scenarios you always try to frame things into that sort of system, and in doing so you make many assumptive leaps that even those you'd praise are bound to question.
To have someone delusional speak of another's delusions can be interesting.
"I have no choice but to agree with what Whoameye said."
Of course, it was meant for you to. 
It's how one gets their foot in the door.
"And I don't see anyone here trying to figure me out cause some of you already think you know me well enough. Do you not ?"
There is always room for more questions. Even from those prone to repeating themselves they'll show elements of variation from time to time that can lead to following different paths from the norm. Sometimes the outcomes are predictable, which can serve a purpose of it's own when the time calls for it, but then there's the times where it's something I didn't expect... and those times are exciting.
It's always worth asking questions, as there's always the potential for more.
I can give myself as many choices as I want. You're out of my mind the moment I close this site, bud, so I won't go out of my way to prove anything to you. But how about this: we settle a time and a place I want IN EUROPE, you buy a plane ticket and come there, I give you all the "proof" you want, then you fuck back home. Make sure you take into account a few hospitalization days before you choose your return date. These are my terms. I have no intention of you finding out my identity buddy, I'm not as stupid as you.
My credibility regarding who I am has no importance in our conflict here. My credibility had nothing to do with you saying stupid, ignorant shit that I called you out on, or you making laughable puppets in order to get accepted here. I suggest you try to work on being less ridiculous if you want me to cut you some slack.
