Delini t1_j81osg1 wrote

You really need to think up some better insults if you’re goal here is to make me cry.

Try something creative. Like if I said “it’s like I’m have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent” try a witty comeback rather than just use the last insult your mom called you.


Delini t1_j812a1a wrote

Wow, you ask a lot of questions for someone who gets upset by answers.

I’d answer the questions individually, but it think it might break your brain if I gave that many answers. The answers basically boil down to:

You were curious about where you doubled down, and I told you.


You’re vastly overestimating how invested I am in this conversation.


Delini t1_j80f8sf wrote

> The only person who's answered my question never got a response from me

I answered one of your questions. And now you’re whining about it.

A lot.

> Stop pinking me, Karen. When you reply, it pings me. Then i gotta read the boring shit you type. Stop it.

Oh for fucks sake. Solve your own damn problems, I literally don’t care in the least what your phone does, if you don’t like what it’s doing, fix the problem yourself like a big boy.


Delini t1_j808wou wrote

>The second thing you pulled literally has nothing at all to do with the title, it just addresses the fact that if you know enough to know how to word your Google search, you know enough to address the question i was asking. Third entry you quoted has to do with the same thing as the second - if you know that Candice is Murphy, you know enough to answer the question.

So you couldn't use the title to figure out which words were relevant to a google search.

But not because it was too cryptic, you just didn't know what it said.

Well, you obviously didn't do the homework I asked you to do.


>What the fuck are you talking about? Show me where someone answers the question and i ask them how i could have known that?

Jesus Fucking Christ man. You typed it, then I quoted it, and you need me to find it for you again? No.


Delini t1_j7zz07g wrote

>Can someone expand on the title a little bit, for those of us who don't recognize any of the names in the title, or the face pictured?

So, you can't read the title.


>Yeah, when you know this, it's super easy to google around and find what you know.

So, you can't read the title.


>Murphy is a stereotypically male name, which adds further confusion, unless you have this knowledge ahead of time.

So, you were confused by the title.


Three times, you stated the title wasn't clear to you. Now, your homework is to look up what the word repeatedly means, and what the word cryptic means. If you do that satisfactorily, I'll still decline your offer. I'm uninterested in your lame excuses.


Delini t1_j7zohvq wrote

Your repeated insistence that the title was too cryptic to figure out what to google is what you’re doubling down on.

Even after someone pointed out to google “ Candice Bergen” and “Murphy Brown”, you were all like “how could I possibly know that”!

If you spent half the effort you use justifying your laziness on just not being lazy in the first place, you could have learned a lot more about Candice Bergen by now than just what was already in the title.

But hey, you do you. Don’t let random internet people trick you into self improvement.


Delini t1_j5uc8c4 wrote

>... unless I see some kind of evidence of the contrary

That's easy. Watch Netflix.

>... my default assumption is that these people are competent at the jobs.

Have you met people? Personally, I look at low odds of getting a group of competent ones together at the same place, and use the default assumption that at one point they were less incompetent than their competitors and that momentum can keep things going for a long time after that is no longer true.