Moonbox

and the lawsuit from Trump, and his approval being required for the multi-billion media merger. 🙃

Considering Nietzche was deeply anti-christian and anti-religious, and the opening post decries the lack of christianity (the foundational faith or moral framework) in today's societies, I'd say that profundity is questionable. I understand how starved you/we are for this sort of deep-thinking and serious discussion, but this OP is nothing but a bunch of philisophical buzzwords and emotionally charged abstractions posturing as intellectual depth. The connecting logic and reasoning to support bundling together sexual freedom, hedonism, narcotics, liberal rights, idolatry, christianity (or lack theirof) and how they lead to societal collapse is non-existant.

You like this post? It's pseudo-profound intellectual gobbledygook, and very likely AI-written (or at least heavily assisted) at that.

Fried food is bad for you, but a lot of people still eat it. I reckon that hot dog eating contests are unusual outside of North America. ================= There is no point whatsoever in this sort of post.

I don't need to refute your limp insults, nonsense-logic and your emotional ranting. Nobody makes you look worse than yourself. 🙃

Thank you for at least acknowledging that I said that, and not trying to pretend that I'm a CBC swill-drinker or that I pay it much attention. That's not the "definition of lying". The things you list can be a type of lying, but that depends on the framework and the context. A news site cannot cover everything, so by default they must choose to publish some stories and "omit" others. Whether they're exaggerating or minimizing a story's importance is also a matter of perspective, and if we use your definitions, then you're probably lying every time you comment on CBC...

Listen, dude, constantly claiming people run away from you is just a sad form of self-affirmation for someone whose sense of status comes from exhausting strangers online. It shouldn't need to be explained, but there's not much to gain from a 40-post slog with a pedantic fool whose content mostly revolves around insisting people hold positions they've never stated and then accusing them of lying when they won't own his strawman. 🙃

Typical muppet-logic. "They're factual because they're factual..." (because you say so) 🤣 Can't wait for your next long-form response.

You mean you make a dumb strawman, then complain when your opponent doesn't own it, and then accuse them of running away. The crazy thing is how consistently you do it, and the fact that you can't seem to realize how much of a ridiculous broken record you are. 🙃

No, I can't, but that's a separate thing entirely than your utterly ridiculous characterizatization. You have already lost the thread when you posted that thread title as a non-parody of yourself.

No, it is not the first time, but you're highlighting where your connection with reality severs. You "pointing things out" and or calling them "factually accurate" doesn't make them so, even when you insist on it really hard. Projecting "emotional hissy fits" is about as unobjective or factual as claims come, but here you are, typing it into the AI and proudly displaying how it tells you what you want to hear as some sort of non-embarrassing "evidence" for your insults. You can't make this stuff up...Jesus. 🤣

Why are people still responding to this guy? It's low effort, low-wit trolling.

Funny how you recognize other people doing it, but you can't recognize how often you do it yourself. 🤔

No, I don't disagree. I remember before the last Biden/Trump debate saying something the effect that "All Biden had to do was not be a vegetable" to win that debate. He couldn't meet that test. No, I'm suggesting that his thread title, the OP, his idea that the so-called Left is all full of retards and there's only three smart ones in the entire world is what makes him a ridiculous, silly man.

The title and topic of this thread tell us everything we need to know about how much intelligent thought is happening in that head of yours. You're a ridiculous, silly man.

Not for what I'd originally asked, but that's okay, you showed us what you were doing anyway. Is insisting that I'm obsessing over your post count or that I'm having emotional hissy fits magically supposed to be more compelling because you insisted on it into the AI, rather than directly? 🤣

“Trust me guys, the AI totally diagnosed him. No, you can’t see the prompts.” Very scientific. Right up there with “my girlfriend goes to another school. 🤣

Who's distracting here? You've barfed out now 4 or 5 different AI outputs, and you're refusing to show us what you're feeding into it. You're literally asking an AI to regurgitate your limp insults back at me. Show us what you asked the AI. 🤣

No I am just asking you to show us what you're inputting into the AI. Why do you keep refusing? It's because you're literally feeding it your butthurt. 🤣

Why don't you ever share what you prompt the AI with? Is it because you're feeding it your butthurt? Come on buddy boy, show us what you asked it. Here's how it works: https://chatgpt.com/c/6a0cba0f-e7b0-83e8-8bd6-e8bb9a65a977 What sort of person posts 40,000 times on a single internet forum, unprofessionally, over 39 months? Someone averaging 40,000 posts in 39 months is posting roughly 34 times every single day for more than three years straight. That’s not just “active participation” anymore — the forum has likely become a central emotional outlet, identity anchor, or compulsive habit. ...the sheer scale matters. Posting tens of thousands of times is qualitatively different from normal internet use. Most people with balanced lives simply do not sustain that level of output and emotional engagement for years unless the forum is serving a major psychological function for them. So let's see what you fed the AI, angry little man. 🤡👍

Comedy still works, and still works great. The fact that there are a lot of loud, unthoughtful and emotionally immature folk who complain about it (on both sides of the political spectrum) doesn't change that, nor the fact that the industry continues to grow and expand. Folks don't get mad the same way when a joke is legitimately funny and well-crafted. As Andy Warhold once said, "Art is anything you can get away with." Legitimate comics like Anthony Jeselnik get away with things that political trolls like Jimmy Kimmel or Joe Rogan or Tony Hinchcliffe never could. That's obviously not true, unless you're a robot or something. There's plenty of serious thought, it's just not what people are listening to thanks to the algorithms and how they shape engagement. The best comedians out there challenge people's binary thinking and force some introspection.

I'd argue the opposite. Comedy and satire should focus heavily on politics, and people should learn to stop being such fragile little buttercups over it.

You of all people don't get to mock anyone for living with their parents, or their mental health. 😆😆😆😆😆

These thread titles....man...🤣 If I didn't know better I'd guess that Wastecan was doing parody.

Can you provide a link to your input please? I think we would all love to see the butthurt you fed the AI. 🤣