At 3/17/09 05:27 PM, NeonFlame126 wrote:
You said as a threat, I'm stating this isn't a threat.
but you're wrong. Whether or not it was a threat isn't a matter of opinion.
Are TOTALLY not the same thing.
I see you try to dismantle my argument below... let's see.
sirtom posted with intent, naming his target, his planned time of action as well as a picture to back up his claims. That's LEAGUES away from someone saying "grrrrrg I'ma kill someone today."Intent - I wanna kill people
Emo intent - I wanna kill someone
Okay, this isn't an argument. It's not even relevant to the "debate."
ToA - School (Nearest chance)
Emo ToA - Whenever I can (Nearest chance)
You make some insane assumptions here. Did you know there's a CLINICAL difference between vaugely stating a target and identifying an immediate one? No, I assume you did not.
Picture of a greenish box holding no evidence
Picture of them being extremely emo, still no evidence
Wow. You just... clearly have no idea what we're even talking about here do you?
Sorry, should I cluster every instance together and decide from that? I'm pretty sure that's how this business started. The killing one, I mean. How is this threat any less real or public than the hollow "everyday " ones?
I thought I made that clear:
Plausible intent, stated target and time.
An open website for flash gamers and makers is less public than a website for emo kids? That's like saying Hot Topic is less public than Macys.
When did I compare the publicity of the two?
If someone reposted this on Nickelodeon.com (or the like) I'm sure you wouldn't get arrested.
Again, what you're "sure" of is not relevant.
Of COURSE it did. If there were a million Rigs and DHTs, this would've turned out much differently than a million people who took it as I did.
... You've never really been exposed to proper argument structure have you? Ugh.