On the Pleasure of Hating.

[ding]

Really?

You respond to my post and I ask for clarification and you tell me to be quiet?

Yes.

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

My wrath?

I can do the death stare.

Aren't you just thrilled it's about you? Enjoy.

No, I’m not thrilled about it. I didn’t come here looking for it.

I’m saddened by it.

 

[Mindful]

Yes.

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

My wrath?

I can do the death stare.

Aren't you just thrilled it's about you? Enjoy.

No, I’m not thrilled about it. I didn’t come here looking for it.

I’m saddened by it.

What did you come here for?

To be awkward?

 

[ding]

Get over yourself already and stop gunking up the conversation.

If you can't even follow the simple flow of the conversation, one cannot be had.

You started an argument by saying "I would argue"

Someone commented on "that argument"

Then, you had to ask which argument. That's such tedious disregard for comprehension and it sucks for anyone to have to deal with.

All she had to clarify. There were literally two different positions. I prefer not to make assumptions.

Only two?

That's unadventurous of you.

Yes. Only two.

Oh shame.

The shame is yours. Or at least it should be.

 

[ding]

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

My wrath?

I can do the death stare.

Aren't you just thrilled it's about you? Enjoy.

No, I’m not thrilled about it. I didn’t come here looking for it.

I’m saddened by it.

What did you come here for?

To be awkward?

For honest discussion.

 

[G.T.]

Be quiet!

Really?

You respond to my post and I ask for clarification and you tell me to be quiet?

Yes.

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

 

[Mindful]

If you can't even follow the simple flow of the conversation, one cannot be had.

You started an argument by saying "I would argue"

Someone commented on "that argument"

Then, you had to ask which argument. That's such tedious disregard for comprehension and it sucks for anyone to have to deal with.

All she had to clarify. There were literally two different positions. I prefer not to make assumptions.

Only two?

That's unadventurous of you.

Yes. Only two.

Oh shame.

The shame is yours. Or at least it should be.

I never thought about it that way.

 

[ding]

Really?

You respond to my post and I ask for clarification and you tell me to be quiet?

Yes.

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

It’s a phrase. An expression. It conveys I am taking a different position.

 

[G.T.]

Yes.

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

It’s a phrase. An expression. It conveys I am taking a different position.

when you use the turn of phrase, and then someone refers to it - one would think it would be easy to understand what they're pointing back to............and it's that implied ease - that one would assume - that makes me wonder that you're just fuckin trolling all of the time. That was the thought process.

 

[ding]

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

It’s a phrase. An expression. It conveys I am taking a different position.

when you use the turn of phrase, and then someone refers to it - one would think it would be easy to understand what they're pointing back to............and it's that implied ease - that one would assume - that makes me wonder that you're just fuckin trolling all of the time. That was the thought process.

I can’t control how you take it.

 

[Mindful]

Really?

You respond to my post and I ask for clarification and you tell me to be quiet?

Yes.

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

One doesn't do rational discourse with a control freak like you. I've seen no evidence of that from you. Very worked up? How about uber worked up? Like you?

 

[ding]

Yes.

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

One doesn't do rational discourse with a control freak like you. I've seen no evidence of that from you. Very worked up? How about uber worked up? Like you?

How exactly did I control you?

I literally said I did not understand what you wrote and I asked two clarifying questions so that I could better understand what your meaning was. And here we are two pages later off topic.

 

[G.T.]

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

It’s a phrase. An expression. It conveys I am taking a different position.

when you use the turn of phrase, and then someone refers to it - one would think it would be easy to understand what they're pointing back to............and it's that implied ease - that one would assume - that makes me wonder that you're just fuckin trolling all of the time. That was the thought process.

I can’t control how you take it.

That's what she said.

 

[Mindful]

GT.

You are obviously here to provoke a confrontation with me.

However, if you really want a fist fight, and to insult me to hell and back, I'll meet you in the Badlands. Behind the bicycle sheds.

 

[ding]

GT.

You are obviously here to provoke a confrontation with me.

However, if you really want a fist fight, and to insult me to hell and back, I'll meet you in the Badlands. Behind the bicycle sheds.

I am here to discuss your topic.

 

[Mindful]

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

One doesn't do rational discourse with a control freak like you. I've seen no evidence of that from you. Very worked up? How about uber worked up? Like you?

How exactly did I control you?

I literally said I did not understand what you wrote and I asked two clarifying questions so that I could better understand what your meaning was. And here we are two pages later off topic.

 

[G.T.]

Yes.

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

One doesn't do rational discourse with a control freak like you. I've seen no evidence of that from you. Very worked up? How about uber worked up? Like you?

You're just projecting, Mindful.

You get very control-freakish, and then project that out onto other folks and the simple fact of the matter is that you're scape-goating your inability to deal with disagreements reasonably.

That's why you tried to control the discussion on morality and ban speech that you didn't like (politics) when in fact it pertains directly to morality.

It's because you're a narcissist. Raise your paw, dear. You have entire threads to bash your political opponents and apologize for Trump, and then accused me of talking about Trump every day when it's actually RARE that I do.

You're not an adult.

 

[ding]

Again let me reiterate that we first hate ourselves and then we hate in others what we most hate about ourselves.

 

[Mindful]

So you are only interested in your opinion or opinions that are in agreement with your opinion?

That doesn't excuse you.

From what? All I did to incur your wrath and the wrath of GT was to ask you to clarify two things.

Apparently that was asking too much. So here we are 15 posts into to being off topic and discussing me instead of the OP.

I was pointing to the reality that you, in fact, grind all of the axes and so when you start a sentence with "i would argue" and then one follows it by saying they've seen that argument? If you then ask which argument, it's almost as if in some psychotic, sociopathic way you really just enjoy bickering over every tiny little fuckin thing - like the emotions of sealy bobo's dog....you literally tried to argue with a messageboard guy that he's misinterpreting his own dog.

Mindful, on the other-hand, is a control-freak and gets very worked up when someone disagrees with her - and instead of then fleshing out any rational discourse, she regresses into this psychotic game of typing wishy-washy meta-bullshit to try and be coy.

One doesn't do rational discourse with a control freak like you. I've seen no evidence of that from you. Very worked up? How about uber worked up? Like you?

How exactly did I control you?

I literally said I did not understand what you wrote and I asked two clarifying questions so that I could better understand what your meaning was. And here we are two pages later off topic.

You didn't control me, and I didn't say you did.

I said the GT was trying to control me.

 

[Mindful]

Again let me reiterate that we first hate ourselves and then we hate in others what we most hate about ourselves.

Enjoyment. Discuss that.

 

[G.T.]

Again let me reiterate that we first hate ourselves and then we hate in others what we most hate about ourselves.

That's only true in some cases, unless there's something about child molesting in myself that I hate before I'm able to hate them sorts of psychotics. There's no one-size fits all in the category of human emotion and contemplation and if there were, we'd be robots and not at all innovative either.