>>9136795Yes, but at the same time you're only half right.
True, there is a "bad guy," and that bad guy is referenced with whatever nomenclature fits the situation best.
What you're wrong about, I think, is the idea that the nomenclature isn't applicable.
If someone is being retarded, in my own view of course, it's perfectly fair to call them whatever insult fits their actions. If I can't see who they are via some account system, and can only go off on their posts themselves, then it seems perfectly natural to assign a label to them that's befitting of their post.
Whether they are or aren't, I can't say. I'm no moderator. But if their actions are mantling a retards points, then they are in effect no different from the retard I claim them to be, right?
It's a question of "if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, talks like a duck, but calls itself a goose, is it wrong of me to call it a duckfag when it shits up my picnic?"
