Live, or YouTube from CSPAN feeds?
######(If there’s a Sekrit Special TPM Way to do it, you can tell me… I promise I won’t tell anyone. Otherwise I’d just look up the html tag :D)
(btw the hashtag trick was new to me too, so thanks!)
Actually, the way I do it on this site is the traditional html ‘< sup >’ - ‘< /sup >’ and ‘< sub >’ - ‘< /sub >’ tags (remove the spaces from each side of these tags and put your exponent or subscript between the tag pair to make them work in the wild). Another site I go to let’s you do it with a carat (’^’) but that doesn’t work here for me.
1 Like
What, you think this wasn’t a good thing for Biden? I do. “Kim Jong Un doesn’t like me” seems to be a good thing to talk about. Do you disagree? @inversion
Aaron hasn’t read the piece, so Aaron will let you two talk about it.
Aaron didn’t need to read the piece, whoever Aaron is. If inversion knows Aaron and wants to explain his relevance, that’s up to inversion. But since inversion apparently had an issue with the relevance of a snarky response to a dictator’s silly ready-fire-aim screed against the Democratic frontrunner, I did them the courtesy of including them in my reply.
k?
My name is Aaron and usually when I say my actual as opposed to, that usually means I’m pissed off or (in this instance), I wanna keep distance.
Guess which way I’m leaning towards. (at least right now)
1 Like
Nope, I said that I didn’t read it and as of now, I don’t wanna.
Anything else?
1 Like
Did someone have control of Aaron’s keyboard when user “inversion” upvoted a comment claiming that I had nothing relevant to say?
k, I’ll bite.
Aside from being the second person (I’m lying) to call me out on my upvoting choices,
A) why is this piece important to you?
B) why is my opinion (or my upvote) important to you?
btw, we’ve done this before, so you know that I can go all day. #theresthedoor
Ah yes, always classy.
Although reductio ad absurdum is a perfectly valid form of argumentation, it wasn’t employed in the comment to which you’re replying. There was, of course, no mischaracterization, deliberate or otherwise, your bare conclusory assertions notwithstanding.
My position is quite clear:
And you can read back in the history of that comment as well as I can. If you (plural) want to keep characterizing perfectly valid points of view as those of bots, trolls, checkers fans, purity ponies, or whatever else, then kindly GFY.
This is a comment thread. It’s not a formal presentation, a court argument, or anything like it.
sniffit’s original comment was off topic but fun – as they quite aptly put it, “hilarious.” I responded in kind. I would think that “Kim Jong Un says I’m a poopyhead” would be a badge of honor for any Democratic candidate for office. That was the gist of my reply. sniffit saw fit to attack me in reply. You upvoted it.
I often respect what you have to say. Sometimes I disagree. Is that enough answer to why your opinion/upvote is important to me? Especially given that the comment itself quite plainly attacked me, and was of absolutely no substance.
Once you can explain what you mean by “this piece” I can answer part (A).
As for where the door is, you walked through it about 3 comments ago.
So that means that I can go through all your likes and call u out on the ones that I think are horrendously backwards, yes?
1 Like
Absolutely. Feel free.
Note that of course that’s not what happened here. I logged in and checked my replies, found one substance-free comment that attacked me, and noticed that it had one upvote: yours.
Be that as it may, feel free to troll through my comments and upvotes to your heart’s content. Happy to discuss any and all of them. Have at it. @squirreltown
Meanwhile, I note you still haven’t explained what you meant by (A). But hey, we’ve done this before, so you know that I can go all day. #theresthedoor
So that means that I can look through your stuff, because you’re so offended by who I upvote
k.
No, you’re keeping this going for some reason and my opinion doesn’t mean Jack to you, because if it did, this wouldn’t be a continuing topic.
Anything else?
After all, it took you two hours to respond to my last remark.
Just so it’s clear, I wouldn’t tag folks who don’t want to get involve with this (short of voting).
It’s called harassment and it might get you tossed.
Anyhow, thank you for @'ing me.
You’re reaching. Badly.
As I already said, yes. Feel free. It’s all public.
Not who. What. Big difference. Yes, I was curious why you upvoted such an obvious attack. I thought it was beneath you. Perhaps I was wrong.
Two whole hours? Really? Really?
Takes two to tango, Sparky.
Quite the contrary. If it didn’t, I wouldn’t have bothered.
Yup, two hours.
I know the telegraphs are broken in your neck of the woods, but you’re usually quicker with responses.
Or you could consider me a bother.
So it is harassment, right?
Four minute response
Keep up the good work