Indeed. Dave sees that as one of the red flags for sock-puppetry: trying, perhaps a little too hard, to establish a unique persona.
SideshowBob has different screen names on other sites. He doesn't tell you what those sites are because his persona would probably be easy to spot.
Seattle assumes any new poster who gets into it with someone on some controversial issue immediately is a sock-puppet.
When you go begging for attention↗°, don't complain when you get it. No, really, this is like your earlier bawling↗ about the infraction; it's not so much that, amid everything else going on, "the biggest concern is Seattle and his sincerity", but, rather, that you make the point of demanding attention. Meanwhile— —we're still waiting on that content. ____________________ Notes: ° It really is a strange sequence in which you responded to my address of BwS with something about James R, then 2) changed the subject to yourself when answered.
Much like your content, it's in the eye of the beholder. When I post, it's "begging for attention" or "bawling" when you post, to wit, ergo, 'twixt us" it's what? Crying about a tongue in check comment by Billvon about "killing the gays"? You're just begging for attention yourself are you not? There was a point in time when every poster, in your judgement was "gaslighting" or "trolling". You could accuse any opinion that you didn't agree with as being one of the other of those. Passive-aggressive behavior toward James is just begging for attention when it could more easily be handed in a staff member forum. Much of the time your posts are so veiled that many members don't even know who you are passively trying to admonish, to wit, James, me or whomever. Ergo, why do it?
Every sentence is problematic: Which in this case relies on unreliable standards, namely yours↗, already enumerated, and unmet. Normally I would presume at least something you post isn't necessarily begging for attention, but if you insist, sure, I'll believe otherwise. More particularly, sure, if you post rape envy, or struggle so hard to drag a discussion back to yourself, yes, you are seeking attention. He's past tongue in cheek. We must, at some point, take his words at face value. Those turnabout lines work better when they don't rely on fallacy for justicication. Make-believe. As the Senate Majority Leader reminds, you can pretty much accuse anyone of anything in re any opinion someone doesn't agree with. You should probably pay attention to what goes on; regardless of how you feel about James or me, someone did ask. That's just your poor reading comprehension. Depends on the occasion. In other news, you're not using "passive-aggressive" correctly.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7e/Itchy&Scratchy.jpg
