>>23634096>It's not nitpicking, it's just nitpicking. Let's nitpick some more. My dude, if we're going to fight like a married couple, the least you can do is buy me dinner.
>I'm pretty sure you were just writing fastThat's a very good take, but it is also something else to check something a little bit more meta, however you cleared that potential underlay, which is why I can be a little bit more friendly, albeit smug and sassy with you. You're free to keep your subjective take on it, I will not correct you in that, because that's not in my best interest. If I was in the business of telling you what to believe, this mask wouldn't be as effective as it is, there are other masks for that specific application.
>You are human. Hey hey! Awesome! We're getting somewhere, yes, there's a human behind the screen, behind the mask, and the mask and the human aren't entirely the same person. Why does the mask continue to double down on the mask, speak on matters of the mask in a specific way and tone?
>Because that's the way you are acting. That's the way you are perceiving it, I already told you, "I could tell you the truth, but not here, not publicly." That was the answer I stated earlier.
>I don't need backhanded forgiveness from someone with delusions of grandure. Good! You shouldn't take it, you need to set up a level of respect from others, and from yourself as well.
>the last bit. This is the bit that's difficult, because you're both addressing the mask and the human underneath it, confusing the two, while keeping to your subjective box. If you look to the mask, it's some grandeur stage play, a foolish Don Quixote wearing a feather boa, that won't admit a fault, even if the shoes are untied. If you look at the human underneath the mask, of which, you're glimpsing at, you're seeing an actual truth. I'm trying to do the best with the tools at my disposal, and working on what I have, it's not perfect, but it works. Don't confuse a wolf for a man.
