You are adding NEW items as you go along to seemingly corroborate your double standards claims whilst ignoring STRONGER evidence of your pal laudas wrong doing that you included on DT.
The thread is about Quickseller, not about Lauda. Create one about Lauda if you want.
1. this person babo adds an ON TOPIC and RELEVANT but BOGUS CLAIM full of spurious bullshit and double standards. HOWEVER since it seems to support YOUR OWN AGENDA you do not seek to have it removed. He is on topic and relevant because he is adding MORE negatives (groundless ill thought out and weak sauce crap full of double standards) but still can NOT BE CALLED OFF TOPIC it claims QS being dangerous to deal with and apparently having double standards.
I don't understand most of what babo was babbling about and
I said so in the thread. If you think the post is off topic - report it.
Your post was complete bullshit as usual and consisted mainly of whataboutism and trolling.
DID you report 14 also?
No.
edit - much later.... err suchmoon??? where did you go? put those donuts down and get back to this debate fatty.
Cookies, not donuts. There is no debate because you're incapable of staying on topic.
Try again. This time read our prior post a few times.
The clue is that babo was on topic because he is supporting your argument by CLAIMING that QS is inconsistent apparently and therefore untrustworthy and dangerous THIS IS WHAT THE THREAD IS ABOUT FFS. These claims were based on mostly groundless garbage as we demonstrated but still his post and our own rebuttal is on topic and relevant.
If you don't understand his post then how would you know his or own response to his points are off topic and irrelevant.
Same old suchmoon.... always a pleasure
You can't say because you do not agree with our points with regard YOUR CENTRAL POINTS or you BELIEVE they are flawed arguments they should be deleted as off topic. Idiot. The reader gets to decide on this.
We are throwing your spurious accusations and speculations into the relevant CONTEXT for the reader to judge whether you are to be trusted or dangerous yourself. You are presenting this claim for lesser deeds then including on to DT person where there is clear evidence of FAR WORSE and FAR MORE DANGEROUS behaviors. Define dangerous then we don't need to bring the context to clearly demonstrate you are posting shit you do NOT EVEN BELIEVE YOURSELF. The observable evidence shows you do not consider these things truly dangerous else your mind is entirely fucked to include on DT people that have done far worse.
If someone shows me two large cages 1 with a mouse inside, 1 with a starving lion and starts telling me the mouse is dangerous and not go on in that cage but says the other cage is totally SAFE and I should enter. I say fuck off you maniac. You are the dangerous one. You are telling me that because I was informing the reader you believe a starving lion is safe and that you are presenting a mouse as a serious danger that I am off topic and the reader does not need to hear our warning. Fuck off back to your cookie jar. The reader needs people like us.
Anything that does not support your CLAIMS or bolster your bogus arguments are apparently off topic and irrelevant.