@[email protected] to [email protected] • 1 year agoRulesh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square376fedilinkarrow-up1958arrow-down120
arrow-up1938arrow-down1imageRulesh.itjust.works@[email protected] to [email protected] • 1 year agomessage-square376fedilink
minus-square@Madison420link1•1 year agoYou’ve literally argued that I’m seeing about the idiom for well over a dozen comments. Your memory is apparently quite short.
minus-square@Madison420link1•1 year agohttps://douchebag.com/ I can provide links that don’t change the substance of the argument as well.
minus-square@Madison420link1•1 year agoI do, I also know it doesn’t actually change what you’ve said. You say the idiom is not what the author themselves says it was, adding /s doesn’t change that.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink1•1 year ago You say the idiom is not what the author themselves says it was That’s not what the comment you linked sad. I didn’t say anything about the idiom itself.
minus-square@Madison420link1•1 year agoIt didn’t say anything no, it implied I’m wrong and your translation is correct. It’s that not the content of your comment?
You’ve literally argued that I’m seeing about the idiom for well over a dozen comments. Your memory is apparently quite short.
Where? Show me a comment/quote.
Need more boo boo?
https://feddit.de/comment/4681048
https://toneindicators.carrd.co/#masterlist
https://douchebag.com/
I can provide links that don’t change the substance of the argument as well.
Do you know what “sarcasm” is?
I do, I also know it doesn’t actually change what you’ve said.
You say the idiom is not what the author themselves says it was, adding /s doesn’t change that.
That’s not what the comment you linked sad. I didn’t say anything about the idiom itself.
It didn’t say anything no, it implied I’m wrong and your translation is correct. It’s that not the content of your comment?