Toggle menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Topic on Talk:Psychiatry

From ProleWiki, the proletarian encyclopedia
Line 1: Line 1:
You are, I admit, quite boorish to argue with. I have disproven your arguments many times at this point, yet you persist in making the same arguments, merely in a somewhat reworded manner. When I note and critique your dishonest and comradery behavior when conversing over this subject, you simply deny you ever do such actions, and then proceed to repeat said behavior soon after.  
You are, I admit, quite boorish to argue with. I have disproven your arguments many times at this point, yet you persist in making the same arguments, merely in a somewhat reworded manner. When I note and critique your dishonest and uncomradery behavior when conversing over this subject, you simply deny you ever do such actions, and then proceed to repeat said behavior soon after.  


While I do certainly apologise if I may have samed harsh or even belligerent in my tone and wording, what I said is not simply name-calling; it is not an insult to call somebody who perfectly meets the definition of a term that term. Likewise, I call you a conspiracy theorist (or atleast somebody who promotes a mindset which produces conspiracy theories) because you have openly supported, and indeed acknowledged, that you promote the "Big-Pharma" conspiracy theory. To quote you in your own words:
While I do certainly apologise if I may have samed harsh or even belligerent in my tone and wording, what I said is not simply name-calling; it is not an insult to call somebody who perfectly meets the definition of a term that term. Likewise, I call you a conspiracy theorist (or atleast somebody who promotes a mindset which produces conspiracy theories) because you have openly supported, and indeed acknowledged, that you promote the "Big-Pharma" conspiracy theory. To quote you in your own words: