Submitted by SnortingCoffee t3_118eh0l in washingtondc
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h2g7h wrote
Reply to comment by ShitFucker101 in Two-thirds of McPherson Square homeless remain on street, D.C. says by SnortingCoffee
"a dozen or 2 homeless people who decided to build a shanty town in a central park"
glopmod t1_j9h60mz wrote
You... said they weren't homeless. Now you are saying they are. Do you understand why they asked how you would classify them?
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h6t7a wrote
Nope that's just word games. You know exactly what I meant.
glopmod t1_j9h7aoa wrote
I don't, and neither does the other person, because you're communicating like shit and immediately contradicting yourself, which has confused multiple people.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h7v42 wrote
Nah, you're just using a weird aloof super progressive attack pose to try and push me into saying something you can screenshot for a tweet later. Just let it go man. Everyone else knows what I said. I don't need an editor.
umadbr00 t1_j9ha3b7 wrote
​
>The dozen or 2 people that decided they could build a shanty town in a public park 2 blocks from the White House are not "the homeless".
>
>"a dozen or 2 homeless people who decided to build a shanty town in a central park"
You said they werent homeless. Then you said they were homeless. This isn't word games. Either you're trolling or truly contradicting yourself.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9harz5 wrote
You literally just quoted me than paraphrased it wrong.
I can't teach you the nuances of written English.
umadbr00 t1_j9hoky1 wrote
If you are insinuating that "the homeless" has some sort of different meaning than being homeless you're going to need to be explicit about what you mean. Clearly no one else in this comment thread understands you.
HamG0d t1_j9ihidm wrote
He’s separating the individuals from the group.
His argument is that the problem isn’t that they are “the homeless”, the issue is that they were in that specific spot. So this wasn’t to combat “the homeless” or fix homelessness, but only to get those individuals out of that area.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9hph8j wrote
I'm not insinuating anything, I am very bluntly pointing out that you are either trolling me or genuinely don't understand what I clearly and correctly wrote.
We done here?
glopmod t1_j9i0poz wrote
That's at least three people you have insisted are too stupid to understand you.
​
Maybe there's a constant in this issue where so many people can't get your shifting statement
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9i60tz wrote
It's called piling on. Have you been to the internet before?
glopmod t1_j9i65hr wrote
Maybe they're piling on because you said something fucking stupid and contradictory and refuse to back down from the demand that it should make sense to everyone
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9i6co0 wrote
Jesus christ, I got 32 up votes, and 3 confused screamers, so I guess 10% can't fucking read. I'm alright with that.
ShitFucker101 t1_j9h2t3c wrote
What’s your point? That there are other homeless people in other parts of dc? If you have something to say then articulate it
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h3jar wrote
You want me to say something less agreeable so you can do some virtue signaling? Am I getting that right?
glopmod t1_j9h6759 wrote
He wants you to decide if they aren't the homeless or if they are.
​
It's not virtue signaling to try to understand your clear fuckup in your incredibly low level logic
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h7bbo wrote
I don't need to define "homeless" so you comment guys can show how pure you are.
12 guys in a park are not "the homeless". We don't need to solve vagrancy before we kick them out of McPherson square.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments