• Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Read my post and quote where it implies you wrote the article.

    The part where you try to cover up your reading comprehension by arguing you’re actually making a good point in that “the article said nothing, it’s been the definition always” when you’re just wrong, and the article is clearly arguing a new thing. The thing I reminded you of, which you pretend the argument didn’t mention.

    Jesus fuck this is like talking to a toddler sheesh

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      The part where you try to cover up your reading comprehension

      That’s not your claim. You said I went back to saying you are the author.

      Show it or apologize.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        You said I went back to saying you are the author.

        I have never said you have said I’m the author. I’ve implied that your rhetoric should be directed at the authors of the article, and not me, since I’m not arguing you.

        The fact that you couldn’t suss that out sort of supports my notion of you having a somewhat bad level of reading ability.

        “Show it or apologise”

        What are you 12?

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 hours ago

            You’re fucking pathetic, you know that? You can’t accept you made a mistake so you go fucking ages on Lemmy pretending you didn’t. Who are you trying to delude except yourself? Not me, that’s for sure

            • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 hours ago

              The author said, “maybe it’s different inside”. My restating the author is not an accusation that you wrote the article.

              • Dasus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 hours ago

                You don’t understand context even. Sheesh. This is what I mean by you having a shit reading level.

                Yes, it is.

                I arguing that you didn’t understand the article. Then you reply to that by disagreeing with the thing you misunderstood.

                  • Dasus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    11 hours ago

                    My argument is that you misunderstood, because of your reading capabilities. For anyone with proper reading comprehension, that’s kinda evident from reading this thread.