No, I want you to concede at the very least that you acted like I was incapable of understanding your ClEveR comment when it was in fact you that made a mistake, and it’d be even better if you admitted that your random “well there were trans people in the 1700s dumby!” quip a. had absolutely nothing to do with what anyone was talking about, b. was unnecessarily rude to someone who only disagreed with you in your own mind, and c. failed to disprove the thing you decided to argue against. But I don’t think you’re gonna do any of that so I think we’re done.
So are ad hominem attacks when someone can no longer defend their position, or even acknowledge the obvious mistake they sarcastically defended.
I don’t see why I would, based on this interaction.
even acknowledge the obvious mistake they sarcastically defended.
I’ve been replying to all your screeds.
Isn’t that acknowledgement enough for you, you greedy little minx?
No, I want you to concede at the very least that you acted like I was incapable of understanding your ClEveR comment when it was in fact you that made a mistake, and it’d be even better if you admitted that your random “well there were trans people in the 1700s dumby!” quip a. had absolutely nothing to do with what anyone was talking about, b. was unnecessarily rude to someone who only disagreed with you in your own mind, and c. failed to disprove the thing you decided to argue against. But I don’t think you’re gonna do any of that so I think we’re done.
tl, dr