chittr
← @cationicAgonist
Avatar
Patron
A certified moneyspender. Thanks for supporting the site!
@cationicAgonist[CA]

“so you hate women” are you fuck1ng 5? lol lmao

Kult: +45
Kull: +40
Total: 85
Ratio: 1.13

>"I don't care." >Makes your own post about it. Interesting - MC Oleana

Kult: +10
Kull: +2
Total: 12
Ratio: 5.00
Avatar
Patron
A certified moneyspender. Thanks for supporting the site!
@cationicAgonist[CA]

are you 5? are you fuck1ng stup1d?

Kult: +2
Total: 2

Are you mad? - MC Oleana

Kult: +10
Total: 10
Avatar
Patron
A certified moneyspender. Thanks for supporting the site!
@cationicAgonist[CA]

no, just d1sappo1nted. 1 have a feel1ng you can do better than some wr1ggler comment at rage ba1t1ng

Kult: +2
Total: 2
Avatar
Patron
A certified moneyspender. Thanks for supporting the site!
@cationicAgonist[CA]

yk what, come back here. where's your WH1T, wheres your CREAT1V1TY, your PASS1ON, DETERM1NAT1ON even. l1terally a grub can do better than "do you hate women" 1n the1r sleep 1ts just embarrass1ng for you l1ke. come on lol

Alright. I thought it kind and magnanimous of me not to rub it in. But since you seem so eager to poke the growlbeast, let's go. You want me to come at you? Because I don't think you even realize what you're soliciting. You haven't even seen a fraction of my power. Nothing you said to me was deserving of even a decimal of my wit. A bulb for a bulb, and a braindead reply for a braindead reply. In case you're not getting it yet, let me spell it out for you: I've already won this interaction, without even trying. I ran mobius strips around you, and made you look foolish. All it took was a couple simple, strategically fired shots to decimate you on the stage of internet discourse. And I barely had to fleX the smallest digit of my frond. Don't believe me? Check the ratio of likes on your post, versus my replies. You'll notice I've eXecuted what they call a "ratio," by shortly and succinctly pointing out the contraction in your words and actions. All I can guess is that you're under some fallacy that the length, or originality of a user's reply is directly correlated to the value, or impact it has. Or the intelligence of the user behind the screen. Which is obviously not true, in the realms of online beef. If I had to guess, such an assumption might come from a particularly arrogant and delusional world view. But since you clearly want something more out of me, here it is. My charity to you. Consider this a victory lap for an argument already won. - MC Oleana

Kult: +2
Kull: +2
Total: 4
Ratio: 1.00
Avatar
Patron
A certified moneyspender. Thanks for supporting the site!
@cationicAgonist[CA]

very funny how 1t took you an ent1re bus1ness n1ght to come up w1th such a shoddy at best, length doubl1ng reply to cope tho lol lmao. wh1t and creat1v1ty on a s1te l1ke th1s 1s best done 1n short form, wh1ch 1’ll g1ve that you d1d, but l1ke? lol? save that “do you hate women?” for the actual m1sogyn1sts and my ass wh1le you k1ss 1t on the way out

Very funny how you just assume that everyone is as terminally online as yourself. That I was coping and seething all night. And not that I simply logged off for the night, not even seeing your second desperate reply. And was simply met with your drivel, freshly, the neXt day. I don't think it takes a genius to see which of us is seething. - MC Oleana

Kull: +2
Total: 2