I should’ve thought of that.

The walking on water part, yeah. But then I asked the praying mantis what the greatest commandment was, and I just got a funny look.

Just out of curiosity, how did you know they were a Nazi?

Just a theory, but speaking from experience, perhaps people are just tired of hearing that particular accusation, especially in the instances where it’s not even correct. It’s the easiest thing to throw around and have some kind of large desired effect.

They removed what you said because it redirected to X? Surprising. You know what’s not surprising? Removing what someone said because it made light of assassination How much money you could save with Geico.

I only ban those who break rules or TOS. Petty angst is neither of those.

Explained by the fact most places won’t even accept dialogues about the topic of Luigi anymore, it has become that inciteful. Even those who want to smear/campaign won’t touch the topic.

As well as elsewhere, I might as well say now.

Why? As a defense?

Yeah, but if it was an action where your membership in a community was at stake, you’d think it would be akin to someone saying “ban me, daddy!”

It wasn’t for a lack of trying.

How so?

What is the meaning of that?

I understood both of those just fine, even understanding the first one before even attempting the second one. Not saying this to throw shade on anyone, but it wasn’t impossible if I stayed with it because you’re supposed to be steady with it.

When saying something complicated (not because of its word choice but because of its premise), is it not typical or natural to tend to choose what one says based on what will expand more easily and what one considers accurate? Suppose you were describing an attitude. You could say “they have a lot of hate”, with “hate” being a recognizable word. Or you could say “they have a lot of disdain”, which is more specific than “hate” but which might be more accurate. You could choose a word for the vibes, the simplicity, the accuracy, the generalization, the speed, etc. and I tend to choose precision because of transparency and because I am anti-lazy.

The problem comes when someone is confused and I offer to paraphrase and they give me the cold shoulder due to displeasure (as well as saying they don’t understand something to be avoidant, which, and I’m serious when I say this, you can often guess based on how they do the first thing and inconsistently exaggerate the issue just to dominate the vibes). I am not entitled to anything, none of you are entitled to anything, and I try to make things as easy as I can and be negotiative (quick note, let’s use this word negotiative as an example… I literally couldn’t fit that in any other way and still have the effect I was aiming for), but then the reaction turns into a weaponized fad rather than something genuine, and I can prove this. Again, transparency. That guides a lot of my habits.

I assume you mean something else by “nuance” than I alluded to. That would be undetermined as of the explanation, as long as you’re saying (perhaps randomly) that I lack it.

Treat rules with too much humanity and you get a lot of human errors. This is something I try to avoid, in fact I’ve recently added a rule guide to the groups I help out in and I can only wonder how anyone would call it non-nuanced. That (the avoidance of excess humanity) doesn’t mean I’m not human or don’t have moments of being considered humorous.

I know what nuance and humor typically mean. Which is why I pointed out that humor is subjective, i.e. there have been times people say I can be humorous, yet I’m not invalidating your opinion of my humor. Nuance, on the other hand, typically means complexity, depth, etc. and my willingness to analyze matters like wealth abuse case-by-case by dissecting the lives of individuals involved, for example, often leads me to wonder if people who say “down with all billionaires”, as has been the case for those advocating copycats of the CEO attack, themselves have any nuance. Generally speaking though, I for one am not one to shame anyone just because of things like lacking nuance or humor.

Who said I was frustrated they don’t do the same to you? Me bringing something up like I have does not reflect frustration, if anything I would be indifferent and only sighing at the double-standardish aspects of much of what is going on. Not sure what you mean by nuance or a sense of humor; the latter is rather subjective and abrupt to downplay someone over. Humor is a skill much like not having dyslexia is a skill.

And there is the issue. The way you shortened it simplified it in a way that several important details and specifications were left out. I said it as short as I could without doing that, which is what you are referring to as “tangential” and containing “jumps between topics”.

They also criticize the practice of using downvotes or negative feedback as a measure of validity or correctness.

So do the mods here, but it’s never enforced, in fact their PSA asking for courtesy with people giving things thumbs down has the most thumbs down of anything in the community.

refusing to engage with people litterally interested in understanding you

I’ve been the one asking which parts people don’t understand, ready to paraphrase, and I have, but there was only one time when someone genuinely answered instead of leaving the question alone except to give thumbs down.

If I were to ask you questions like “what parts don’t you understand” or “can you give me what stands out”, what would your answer be? For those who don’t have one, there you go. I’m the one trying to work with everyone, most people here have just shunned even that, sometimes saying nothing and something responding with “boo hoo” sentences like that (for the record, “the world” isn’t against me, in fact I’m in several of the mod-exclusive servers and they are complimenting my stance/approach… as opposed to hysteric laypeople).

Do you see me resorting to jabs? Would it be a reach to guess that, in your words, this behavior is a part of a broader pattern?

Trying and failing =/= not trying