>>20027248>That is the claim you are making. Multiple times I've written my point in plain English which you, ironically the authority on English are failing to comprehend despite it being in the simplest form possible.
>This is the first time you made this claimNo, it wasn't and the failure to see it lies on you.
>4chan administrator, moderator, or janitor, which m00t is not.*not current* I fixed your sentence for you, even though that doesn't change the reality.
>It is not an appeal to consistencyit is and you specifically invoked it
>No laws work that wayYour replying to a sentence that didn't even have common law as it's crux
>I am literally quoting you hereyour too addled to see that you quoting mismatched sentences which undermines any argument you're trying and failing to make.
>It certainly isESL momento
>What retarded point are you making hereYour illiteracy is not my burden, if you actually read more you wouldn't display your inability make a coherent case.
>I am not making a claim about how 4chan's moderation policy works but what the words in the rules meanThey're the same thing dipshit, the former is derived from the latter.
>Yes it would if you studied logic you would know thisIf you actually knew the words you're spewing out, you wouldn't look like a middle school retard trying to look smarter than anyone can observe.
Every argument I've obliterated so far was made easy because you keep undermining yourself with: incoherent articulation, terrible masquerading of formal formatting, logical fallacies (ironic coming from someone who “studied logic”) and you using words you yourself obviously don't even know how to use.
