>>11262834Yes "not that anon", and if you weren't you would understand what
>>11262813 meant by his post, but you are samefaging and so you assumed the post was as much. Or at least that's what I hope, because the alternative is you can't critically think what was posted:
>like his are part of the problemYou are complaining about a problem you can solve, what does it matter what "anon" you are?
