>>7039340>First of all, I am not the same anon who initially responded to your terrible post. Please stop assuming I am.>Which I suppose I should amend for accuracy's sake: nobody *outside of the desktop share thread* positively regards mass replies.Then why do you feel you have the authority to amend his posts?
>Second, you speak to a lot of assumptions that you believe I'm making, such as>Again you make an invalid assumption: that the content of the post is equal to the post itself,The post itself is simply the fact that I made a reply; the contents of the post were the thing being targeted by "the other anon", but he conflated the posting with the contents. If you're not the same person then you're correct that I made an invalid assumption, but I suspect that you are the same person because he stopped responding around the time you began, and you feel you have the authority to amend his statements for him as if they were your own.
>Third, you attempt to deflect any criticisms of your incompetent defense using inaccurate metaphors and purple prose, and later refer to your paper-thin defense of a technicality as "refuting" a point which, in reality, you only sidestepped. As for your point about conjecture, this line of conversation is its own proof that said conjecture was valid.Meaningless jargon. My metaphor was valid and actually pretty appropriate. As far as my statement about conjecture is concerned, the fact that I am posting the appropriate content ITT as you admitted means that I am not "shitting up the thread" because my text in no way detracts from the wallpapers being posted, nor reduces the amount of wallpapers that can be posted. My words only matter if you read them and care about them, faggot.
>Fourth, you actually managed to fuck up greentexting. You utter mongoloid.I did this on purpose to see if you'd accuse me of attacking someone for a "minor technicality" and then do the same to me. You fell for it like the retard you are. Kys pl0x
