@Nolonar
Of course, that response took a long time too not say much.
I did give you an example, a continuous one at that. I Ignore you two almost every encounter I have. I don't instigate or make the remarks you do, when I see you two comment. Taking the time to tell you to grow up and ignore me, as I do for you, is something I've already done and do.
Also not what an ad hominem is, I acknowledged a stunning coincidence and pointing out your hypocrisy, part of which you ignored. Doesn't even necessarily mean you have multiple accounts and I didn't make an accusation. And yet again, your conduct is relevant.
You really had to stretch there. Is pointing out weird coincidences an attack now? According to you, it seems to be.
Oh yes, responding to comments directed at another person, minutes after that person is online, is completely irrelevant and just a coincidence, and having the same log in, log out time for the next few hours is entirely irrelevant. Maybe you're not dups, which I never said you were, but you sure seem to be coordinating.
That's funny, because I could swear you keep responding to my replies, because you always have to have the last word in. You're so simple, I even predicted that accusation of yours.
Let me give you another prediction: you'll respond to this reply of mine.
And here's another prediction for the road: you'll justify responding again by saying: "you just wanna feel like you won something by getting me to stop responding", or something similar. That's what you said last time I made my prediction, after all.
Wow, a self fulfilling prophecy and a generalization based on two cases which ignores all other cases to the contrary. I can do that too.
Here's a prediction, you or Amplify will reply to this response. There will also be more generic excuses and alternative and sophist definitions of words. Another one, you'll add poor attempts at psychoanalyzing and leading the conversation. Here's another one, you'll use a vowel in your next response. Here's another one, you'll nitpick this response in order to get as much to respond to as possible, and engorge your response to discourage a response due to sheer volume.
I'll take the bait, the more you bring up my own past words just reinforces the idea that you do in fact want to feel like you've won something by getting me to stop responding. You're really hung up on the past, aren't you? It's seems like you really enjoy going "no u", and pretending what's been said against you is really what you've meant all along. How unoriginal and projecting.
By throwing around "fallacy" all the time, you're pretending to be some sort of paragon of logic, but in truth, all you're doing is throw insults and accusations around, while hiding behind the very fallacies you call out.
Now that's ironic two-fold, now who's using false causes? Projection or ironic statements seems to be your #1. You've strewn about just as many, in fact more, insults than I ever have, and just as many fallacies. While making incredible presumptions to boot. Irony seems lost on you.
And now I've taken the time to address your logical fallacies and hypocrisy. How about you lead by example by addressing your own flaws first?
We've already talked about it before, but looks like you still haven't learned your lesson.
Incorrectly, yes. My flaws? Probably taking the bait and responding to you, even though I normally don't and should religiously ignore you. Not that that is relevant to leading by example and shoving a sock in it. Unless you mean to stop responding. Hmmm. How strange, I think you and I made a prediction regarding that sentiment. And oh boy, that's funny, you think you've taught a lesson, no. What you did was lose an argument and scream and shout and repeat yourself in order to exactly what I said.
That's so nice of you, but how about you learn yourself first, before expecting others to. Anything else would be arrogant.
Oh look, more presumptions, and an ironic one at that, that I already have learned, and do.
Oh, yes, what an amazing coincidence.
Another amazing coincidence: You created your account just when another user was banned.
You're just going "no u" and radicalizing and stripping a reasonable acknowledgement of a strange coincidence in order to discredit it and make it seem less reasonable. To take a page from your playbook, that's a fallacy. A textbook example of one at that.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque