• steeznson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Man you had a lot more effort to dedicate to this guy than me lol

    I wonder when he’ll realise that everyone he’s been rude to was basically agreeing with him

    • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      More time than effort on my part. You know you have nothing going on when interacting with a person like that is a reasonable way to kill time. lol

      I’m not sure they ever will realize that. We probably wound up being posted on some anti drug prohibition forum with a “see what I have to deal with?” title and a lot of circle jerking. haha

        • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I am not sure if you meant it as such, but that was a great burn. haha

          I absolutely empathize with the “Bullheaded, everyone is wrong but me” teenage mentality as well. Especially that mentality mixed with unfettered access to the internet.

          Age sure does wear it thin though. haha

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            See, but you are wrong, and now you’re trying to pretend you’re not, because you’re a ~20 something male who can’t accept when they make a mistake, and they always have to learn through being humiliated, than being ashamed for a few weeks, and then not doing that same mistake publicly again.

            Remember the time you actually linked “that’s a fallacy” , thinking naming a fallacy means you “win” a debate, when you presumed that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that the claim itself must be wrong, when obviously, that’s not the case.

              • Dasus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                a day or so about drug liberalisation.

                But you’re pretending we’re not arguing over drug “liberalisation”, so which is it? Am I arguing with you over that, or something else?

                The only point of disagreement is

                So you get to ignore all the stupid mistakes you made, and say what the conversation is about? Seems like you haven’t had any conversations in real life…

                I think you need to work on your persuasive writing and debating skills

                Oh God, more of this. It’s so clear what you value and what you pretend to be. Like when you thought that you’d win an argument by yelling out “fallacy”, as if that meant that another person has to be wrong. Showing so clearly that you think that is an incredibly clear sign of how immature you are, philosophically.

                You’re pretending you don’t know what an implication is (while still arguing based on what you think I implied), you’re pretending like drug wars didn’t start in the 20th century, and you’re pretending you didn’t say all the stupid shit you did. So, what do you think of the book? (Which you haven’t read, like you’ve not read any others on the subject either.)

                Quite frankly, I thank you for the entertainment.

                  • Dasus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    21 hours ago

                    A “war ON drugs” is a bit different from “a war FOR drugs”. Perhaps you don’t speak English?

                    The opioid wars weren’t wars ON drugs.

                    Genuinely I wonder how people like you aren’t ashamed to post. Genuinely baffles me.

                    You don’t even read the comments you reply to. Vice laws have been tried several times in history.

                    You just don’t know your fucking history, yet you’re childish enough to argue me without even having a fucking point. It’s pathetic.

                    It’s generally accepted the war on drugs “really” began in the 70’s, in the form it is today.

                    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_drugs

                    The term “war on drugs” was popularized by the media after a press conference, given on June 17, 1971, during which President Richard Nixon declared drug abuse “public enemy number one”. He stated, "In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive. … This will be a worldwide offensive.

                    This is evident from a whole lot of historic facts — all of which you’re unaware of, obviously.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Hey how about that time when you thought that saying “fallacy” wins you an argument?

        Remember, you larping someone who understand how debating works? Remember that? Oh you don’t, because it’d show just how much of a master debater you are?: )

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      No, he’s not agreeing with me.

      You don’t understand the propaganda.

      Do you think that if everyone who agreed on cannabis being mostly harmless, we’d still have cannabis prohibition? Ofc not.

      And cannabis isn’t even causing the most harm. We can actually get rid of drug cartels and make hundreds of billions of dollars in tax money by legalising drugs, but the efforts to do so are slowed by fucknuts like you and him who don’t realise that you can slow something down even when you pretend to agree with it.