>>58727976You have extremely poor conversation skills, dude. Stop projecting.
>>58728134>It literally does. Cover has an obligation to itself as a businessWhy do you keep moving the goalpost? I already told you we're not talking about this from a business aspect. We're talking about whether or not the men and women should interact with each other. That's it. Nothing more. How did you even fuck that up? You didn't even understand what we were arguing about in the first place. Are you retarded or something? Once again, they have no obligation to remain that way. You're not understanding what I'm saying, even though it's so clear. Also, you're confusing the term "obligation" with the term "dependency".
>KEK. Success is the only relevant argument at hand.Nope. The only relevant argument is whether boys and girls should interact with one another.
>Wrong. Boys aren't cute girls. So there are no boys allowed in CGDCT. Your IQ is very low, isn't it? Okay, so you're just gonna be autistic about semantics, then, huh? Simple solution: Just call it cute girls AND boys doing cute things. Problem solved. That was easy. I love how you called me low IQ, when you couldn't even come up with a simple solution to a simple problem.
>I'm entitled to what I pay for.Nope. Your insubstantial contributions don't entitle you to anything. These girls don't owe you anything just because you did something really insignificant for them. In fact, in their eyes, you're just some random guy who decided to give them money without expecting anything in return. Once again, get over yourself. You're not special. They don't have any obligation to cater to you personally or anyone else, for that matter.
