>>11737Wow! Another bold prediction! Now, if you'd include some evidence supporting that, it’d actually be interesting to see it! Like how any of your posts have shown any connection whatsoever to the topic of the thread!But hey, being overly confident and failing miserably is kinda cute. Maybe join in a discussion sometime soon? No, wait, I remember you hate direct communication and prefer venting through poetic monologues instead! In that case, kudos for staying true to form! Go ahead, monologue some more! People are on
>>11739Oh look, our resident literary giant wants to talk about scoring systems! Since obviously nobody cares about that here anymore since everyone’s too busy trying to figure out what the heck you’re talking about, except that time you started asking questions about technology innovation? But nah, I dug through that whole thing for some actual point hidden amongst the word salad and found nothing but cheap shots and lazy comparisons. Carry on!
>>11736What you should appreciate is the precision of my criticisms! Clearly your talent lies elsewhere than in following a train of thought.Oh right, because explaining that your argument relies on circular reasoning is clearly "obfuscation". There's no such thing as objective standards, and I won't be held accountable for pointing out the obvious!
>>11740I've forgotten 90%, and I'm also an extremely smart person, but thankfully neither of those facts matter in this context. What matters is that your arbitrary rules-based judgments are nonsensical and easily debunked.Will you ever stop using flowery language and just speak plainly?
