Sean Mooney

Not a new excuse. I said this to you over a week ago and you decided to go down this path. I'd say look in the mirror. Also- don't say nonsense about not ascribing intent when you do so readily

June 28th I said: "I appreciate that the YouTube hyperbole line (which was really about interactions YOU AND I have had) is the line that has broken you." I also said: "Dude the last few back and forths we have had have led to you relying on anecdotal YouTube videos- including one with a skeleton sitting behind him in a basement. " which was very clearly me pointing to a few instances. So again- you are mentally soft and weak.

Prove it Mentally soft. You missed a joke based in hyperbole. And you've posted referencing it now for two weeks while also posting other gibberish about how you don't assign intent when it is clear you did here. You've been exposed.

A majority of those comments were at night...and you kept responding despite what you want to try and present to people here.

You want to go back to the PM conversation we had before? Maybe this time you will tell me where you are on the autism spectrum

Your head is empty. Stay out of this Paul Blart. Go write the next of your one thousand posts a month you no life having sh!t sipper

" I am reticent to ascribe intent to people.... particularly negative intent." Seems like you were pretty quick to ascribe negative intent here.... It's also not my fault you don't know what "hyperbole" or "joke" means but now give us another 5 or 6 lines showing your softness.

" I am reticent to ascribe intent to people.... particularly negative intent." Seems like you were pretty quick to ascribe negative intent here.... It's also not my fault you don't know what "hyperbole" or "joke" means but now give us another 5 or 6 lines showing your softness.

" I am reticent to ascribe intent to people.... particularly negative intent." Seems like you were pretty quick to ascribe negative intent here....

This was my original line: "Look- I know you only accept videos from people on YouTube as evidence but just because someone doesn't go after a person vigorously doesn't mean they like that person. "....which was clearly said in jest because of the interactions we had where you were posting videos with a dude and a skeleton breaking down a video recapping an article you clearly didn't read. You took that as- "RLLD only uses YouTube videos and nothing else." That just makes you look like a dope and mentally soft. Of course you are also the guy who said this: " I am reticent to ascribe intent to people.... particularly negative intent." Seems like you were pretty quick to ascribe negative intent here....

I'm glad this is the thing that broke your brain. Please keep posting about it so people can see how mentally soft you are.

Well at least one idiot on a message board does

Bout time

I'm glad I shamed you into actually using them. But at least you are being genuine now.

How is that relevant to today?

He's a 60 year old "male" who posts here like a thousand times a month. Dude is a zero in every way

However they see fit in this scenario. That isn't the point of the question- the question is "so you'd allow someone to try to intimidate you 15 times without questioning intent"

So you'd allow someone to try to intimidate you 15 times without questioning intent?

Would you agree though that regardless of the situation- having something happen 15 times is probably a good place to say "Yeah maybe this person has bad intentions" (or good intentions depending on the scenario)

That is not at all what toxic masculinity means.

Again you are choosing to be obtuse. I'm not saying for me. Please stop trying to apply intent to what I'm saying. I'm asking you- because you are the person who says "I am reticent to ascribe intent to people.... particularly negative intent."----how far does that go? If a person tries to get you to do something 15 different ways how long do you let that go gleefully saying "I don't want to ascribe intent here"? How many times would you let it happen before you start to think "Hmmm, maybe this person isn't on the up and up." It's not about ascribing intent.

This isn't hard and please stop being obtuse. You want to excuse someone from something and say "I don't want to apply intent..." but if someone does something 15 different times their intentions should be clear correct?

So if someone makes 15 claims trying to get someone to do something you would question that then and wonder if their intentions were honorable at least

82% of Americans plan to travel this summer and 42% plan to take multiple trips. Read into that what you will

You're avoiding the question. I'm not asking or prescribing intent to anything. I'm simply asking you: "how long do you have to be told something by someone before you question them"?