Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT 4116-4120 (14th to 18th Dec, 2020)
BlueFatima:
--- Quote from: Tormuse on 17 Dec 2020, 04:03 ---I feel like Jeph did that first panel just for an excuse to draw a butt. :)
--- End quote ---
And what’s wrong with that??? :evil:
Cornelius:
--- Quote from: Shremedy on 17 Dec 2020, 05:24 ---
--- Quote from: awkwardness on 14 Dec 2020, 09:49 ---
--- Quote from: sitnspin on 13 Dec 2020, 21:56 ---Might I recommend not multi-posting?
--- End quote ---
Sorry...I won't bother posting again.
--- End quote ---
While I had some (perhaps overly harsh) words for sitandspin, you're not exactly in the clear either. The rebuke was mild (if perhaps a little passive-aggressive), and you're acting like you've been stomped flat, which is assuredly not the case. Taking your ball and going home is SUPER passive-aggressive, and isn't helpful for people (like me) of a mind to defend you. If you have good reasons to format things the way you do, then just do it, and let other people's opinions about such trivialities be damned. There are other far more cardinal sins to commit in this forum (covered in clearly posted FAQs). Worry about the written, not the unwritten; if the something of the latter becomes genuinely problematic enough, it WILL become written!
--- End quote ---
About that unwritten thing: I actually do believe there's something in the rules section about adding to your post, rather than adding a new one underneath.
Thrillho:
--- Quote from: Shremedy on 17 Dec 2020, 05:08 ---
--- Quote from: sitnspin on 13 Dec 2020, 21:56 ---Might I recommend not multi-posting?
--- End quote ---
What the EFF is "wrong" with keeping replies to separate individual posts, with separate individual points to be made, separated? Who pissed in your Cheerios? It doesn't suit YOUR sensibilities of How To Post? GET OVER YOURSELF.
--- End quote ---
Global Moderator Comment This really wasn't necessary, and nor was your follow up to the previous poster. Cool it down, please.
Case:
--- Quote ---hmmMMmmMMmmmm ...
--- End quote ---
hmMmmhmmMmmMmHmmm ...!
(zOMG this comic has me lauging so hard ... :laugh:)
Case:
--- Quote from: snubnose on 16 Dec 2020, 01:54 ---
--- Quote from: Case on 15 Dec 2020, 16:50 ---
--- Quote from: snubnose on 14 Dec 2020, 23:49 ---Beautiful women dont get away with a lot of things in your reality ?
--- End quote ---
Not really, no.
(click to show/hide)https://www.jurist.org/news/2020/02/incarcerated-women-receive-harsher-punishments-than-men-us-report/
https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/women-receive-harsher-punishment-at-work-than-men
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-get-tougher-sentences-than-men-cjpdx65q7
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2019/jan/12/intimate-partner-violence-gender-gap-cyntoia-brown
https://www.prisonstudies.org/news/federal-report-says-women-prison-receive-harsher-punishments-men
https://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx
--- End quote ---
Your links all refer to differences between genders, not the difference of beautiful vs ugly.
--- End quote ---
True. Also true that neither will even try to accomodate for obviously subjective criteria - for obvious reasons - nor for ironclad solipsism, a penchant for moving the goalposts upon encountering unexpected information or a rock-hard belief that the outcome of a mental process subject to the combined effects of such cognitive distortions constitutes a deep insight or cutting rebuttal (Dunning-Krueger effect).
P:S: If it were true that beauty, not gender, was the deciding factor that the veracity of your claim is desperately clinging to - then why restrict the claim to women in the first place? :psyduck:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version