Search results

::marge:: >If you don't fuggen shitfling or some shieet youz be some fuggin pussy Marge?

Nah Anyways who do I even shitfling against I don't really have any ill will towards anyone ITT, I think I'm just going to remain a centristGOD within the discussion. Except for those JOON TROON KIKES

Ok......but I don't think your involvement and schemery ITT was needed methinks, janny.

Yes I know about that JOON TROON but why did you do that? I dindu nuffin so why did I get a warning. We're allowed to jokingly say "kill jannies behead jannies roundhouse kick jannies into the concrete" because we aren't like reddit farms and we're allowed to criticise and make fun of everything...

obsessed jartyfly jannies

Marge

>Another Jartycuck react @Gemerald In debates and arguments, the burden of proof lies with the individual making a positive assertion - claiming something exists or is true. This person must provide evidence or logical reasoning to support their claim. Conversely, the person denying or...

Kill jannies behead jannies roundhouse kick jannies into the concrete

Fuggen obsessed shemmypedo jartyniggerfly joon trooon kike added >warrior z wife >legal slave KYSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS whoever that certain retarded janny was

>Another jartycuck react @Gemerald To substantiate the claim using empirical, non-anecdotal, tautological, epistemological, and ontological analysis, one must meticulously construct an argument that is devoid of any ethically questionable numerical manipulations and is fully capable of...

obsessed jerdee shemmy fnf cuck

Yeah I didn't add the bits that I PRESUME that @SmallAnus did that Shit like the warrior z wife shit like wtf?

>jartycuck react @Gemerald Provide the epistemological justification for that adequately and incontrovertibly validate the veracity of the aforementioned assertion, it is imperative to construct a layered edifice of exonerative elaborations that are not reliant on anecdotal evidence, but...

prove that claim with empirical, non-anecdotal, tautological, epistemological, ontological pontification. Your negation to me saying it’s not contextually saying that it is an ethically bankrupt deception of numerological proportion categorically imperatively inept at substantiating your...

Responding to your thread on /pol/ isn't obsession, how is that obsession? I'm the real Thrembo btw

This is literally just the results from the poll which doesn't even favour you it favours some other person with "thrembo" in their name. How does this correlate to your argument which supposedly proves that if I post within the thread I agree that I lost? Can you actually prove that claim...

>No actual evidence/sufficient explanation which would prove that I agree if I posted ITT again ... I'm asking him to provide evidence for his claim? How am I copying anyone?

>posting at midnight

Can you prove your claim which suggests that If I post in this thread again I agree? What's the basis for that claim?