Groomers aka sexual predators

Gern Blansten

JB16057 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

JB16057 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

JB16057 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Asking a poster a relevant question regarding posts they’ve made is now a personal attack? Wow.

"Discuss the topic, not the people discussing the topic. No personal comments."

kat Can you clarify? At what point is this personal since I'm the one being singled out here? 

good lord. you can tag people for a reason. I've been tagged and I've tagged multiple people here for their specific stance on a given subject. never once have I seen anyone cry foul over it. 

Yet the admins went through and deleted all of the tags.... hmmm.... I was tagged 1 week after my last comment on this thread and was asked my personal opinion on a subject I wasn't talking about.

Nothing to see here....

because you whined. the mods do that for snowflakes. in all my years here, I've never seen someone cry about being tagged when someone asked a question, no matter how old the comment or even if there was a gross misrepresentation of their position. 

The reason why that rule is in place is for exactly this situation. It's one thing to have an ongoing conversation but to call me out a week later was only to try and catch me in a "gotcha" moment. The question was not relevant to what I was talking about. Why didn't they ask anyone else the same exact question? Because they were trying to make it personal. 

The rules are the rules so sorry if I "whined" and want the rules to apply to everyone, which they clearly do not. Once again, you are discussing the person, not the topic.

dear god give it a rest

Merkin Baller

Thoughts & prayers. 

Kat

We deleted the tags to avoid the many repeat emails from quotes but we are monitoring.

The post in question was directed to JB128716 not JB16057. Not sure what's going on with that.

Again, stick to the topic, please. Let it go, move on, etc. if it's a difficult topic, we can close it to simplify things and preserve everyone's posting privileges.

Have a great Thursday, everyone. Life is short.

Bentleyspop

The term "groomers" is yet another dogwhistle brought to you by the writers at murdoch inc.
The goal is simple more clicks, more views, and more irate members of the base.

In other words more stupidity believed and spread by the stupid.

tempo_n_groove

mrussel1

I really didn’t know that tagging someone was going to hurt feelings.  I thought we were all pretty tricked skin here.  I shan’t do it again.

mickeyrat

mrussel1 said:

I really didn’t know that tagging someone was going to hurt feelings.  I thought we were all pretty tricked skin here.  I shan’t do it again.

this offends me.

shan't.  so archaic.  get with the times old man!!!!

mrussel1

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

I really didn’t know that tagging someone was going to hurt feelings.  I thought we were all pretty tricked skin here.  I shan’t do it again.

this offends me.

shan't.  so archaic.  get with the times old man!!!!

Thou has now offendeth my sensibilities.

OnWis97

mrussel1 said:

I really didn’t know that tagging someone was going to hurt feelings.  I thought we were all pretty tricked skin here.  I shan’t do it again.

How does one trick out their skin? Tats, I suppose.

OnWis97

Bentleyspop said:

The term "groomers" is yet another dogwhistle brought to you by the writers at murdoch inc.
The goal is simple more clicks, more views, and more irate members of the base.

In other words more stupidity believed and spread by the stupid.

They've been doing it for years. Decades, really, when you think about the satanic panic of the 1980s.

It always evolves as a way to stay fresh.  "Groomers" is a nice buzzword to grab attention. That they accuse non-groomers of being groomers and ignore actual groomers doesn't impact the effectiveness of their messages.

mrussel1

OnWis97 said:

mrussel1 said:

I really didn’t know that tagging someone was going to hurt feelings.  I thought we were all pretty tricked skin here.  I shan’t do it again.

How does one trick out their skin? Tats, I suppose.

Thick 

OnWis97

mrussel1 said:

OnWis97 said:

mrussel1 said:

I really didn’t know that tagging someone was going to hurt feelings.  I thought we were all pretty tricked skin here.  I shan’t do it again.

How does one trick out their skin? Tats, I suppose.

Thick 

I knew. Just having fun with a typo.

HughFreakingDillon

JB16057 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

JB16057 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

JB16057 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Asking a poster a relevant question regarding posts they’ve made is now a personal attack? Wow.

"Discuss the topic, not the people discussing the topic. No personal comments."

kat Can you clarify? At what point is this personal since I'm the one being singled out here? 

good lord. you can tag people for a reason. I've been tagged and I've tagged multiple people here for their specific stance on a given subject. never once have I seen anyone cry foul over it. 

Yet the admins went through and deleted all of the tags.... hmmm.... I was tagged 1 week after my last comment on this thread and was asked my personal opinion on a subject I wasn't talking about.

Nothing to see here....

because you whined. the mods do that. in all my years here, I've never seen someone cry about being tagged when someone asked a question, no matter how old the comment or even if there was a gross misrepresentation of their position. 

The reason why that rule is in place is for exactly this situation. It's one thing to have an ongoing conversation but to call me out a week later was only to try and catch me in a "gotcha" moment. The question was not relevant to what I was talking about. Why didn't they ask anyone else the same exact question? Because they were trying to make it personal. 

The rules are the rules so sorry if I "whined" and want the rules to apply to everyone, which they clearly do not. Once again, you are discussing the person, not the topic.

no, it's not. it's because your post tagging the mods was badgering the mods' email inbox. lol.  

Bentleyspop

OnWis97 said:

Bentleyspop said:

The term "groomers" is yet another dogwhistle brought to you by the writers at murdoch inc.
The goal is simple more clicks, more views, and more irate members of the base.

In other words more stupidity believed and spread by the stupid.

They've been doing it for years. Decades, really, when you think about the satanic panic of the 1980s.

It always evolves as a way to stay fresh.  "Groomers" is a nice buzzword to grab attention. That they accuse non-groomers of being groomers and ignore actual groomers doesn't impact the effectiveness of their messages.

They don't care about actual groomers or the kids they assault. Just views on a screen, clicks on a mouse, and donations to their orange savior.

JB16057

HughFreakingDillon said:

JB16057 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

JB16057 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

JB16057 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Asking a poster a relevant question regarding posts they’ve made is now a personal attack? Wow.

"Discuss the topic, not the people discussing the topic. No personal comments."

kat Can you clarify? At what point is this personal since I'm the one being singled out here? 

good lord. you can tag people for a reason. I've been tagged and I've tagged multiple people here for their specific stance on a given subject. never once have I seen anyone cry foul over it. 

Yet the admins went through and deleted all of the tags.... hmmm.... I was tagged 1 week after my last comment on this thread and was asked my personal opinion on a subject I wasn't talking about.

Nothing to see here....

because you whined. the mods do that. in all my years here, I've never seen someone cry about being tagged when someone asked a question, no matter how old the comment or even if there was a gross misrepresentation of their position. 

The reason why that rule is in place is for exactly this situation. It's one thing to have an ongoing conversation but to call me out a week later was only to try and catch me in a "gotcha" moment. The question was not relevant to what I was talking about. Why didn't they ask anyone else the same exact question? Because they were trying to make it personal. 

The rules are the rules so sorry if I "whined" and want the rules to apply to everyone, which they clearly do not. Once again, you are discussing the person, not the topic.

no, it's not. it's because your post tagging the mods was badgering the mods' email inbox. lol.  

And you're continuing to talk about it yet I'm the one getting told to give it a rest... I asked the mods a question and they answered. You should read their reply. 

cincybearcat

There have been a lot of dumb arguments on AMT.... this is making the top of the list.

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/antifaoperative/status/1661501696101556225?t=yB5vVNy4jejBZVZHWZiyWQ&s=19

Merkin Baller

mickeyrat said:

https://twitter.com/antifaoperative/status/1661501696101556225?t=yB5vVNy4jejBZVZHWZiyWQ&s=19

They're only worried about the LGBTQ groomers, I don't know why. 

Just kidding, we all know why. 

HughFreakingDillon

conservatives gonna groom. 

brianlux

mrussel1 said:

I really didn’t know that tagging someone was going to hurt feelings.  I thought we were all pretty tricked skin here.  I shan’t do it again.

My skin is really tricked out right now after a heavy duty session with the liquid nitrogen at the dermatologist.  Burn baby, burn!