Thread:SomeoneYouUsedToKnow/@comment-14017325-20190519155559/@comment-25936766-20190527011020

0551E80Y wrote: 1) Actually the first thing that says about CircleJerk is the sexual act and what you described is a SLANG. Which is not the true meaning.

2) I already said this and which you showed right there. You are using Confirmation Bias.

3) I criticise the subject that people describe but not the actual user like you've been doing to me

4) and yes you set a bad example for the community cos people are gonna look at you and think "Should I engage with this person".

5) I really had no choice because of how you treated me. You ultimately had no right to say those things about me to my face. Its not a hyperbole its a fact. 1) Did you never get any language classes? It's still a definition, used by many people around the world, and not being the original meaning doesn't make it any less true or valid.

By that logic, gays shouldn't call themselves gays, because "gay means happy, not homosexuality". But we live in a society, and societies use this thing called language, which doesn't work like you seemingly think it does.

2) "Confirmation bias: is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses.[1] It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for desired outcomes, emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched beliefs".

Copy pasted from Wikipedia.

You claimed that Circlejerk doesn't mean a group of people complimenting and agreeing with each other continuously. You stated "it is false". So I just googled circlejerk, and first thing on screen is something that proves you wrong. It does mean that. That's not confirmation bias, that's just plain pulling out empirical evidence.

That it also has a sexual definition is irrelevant because anyone who's ever interacted with other people in their lives can see I was not using it and never used it by the sexual definition. Except you, for whatever reason. First person I see that insists on it's sexual definition even when it's not even used in a sexual context.

What is more likely to be confirmation bias however, is you continously insisting that anything I said in your 3 cherry-picked sentences was a personal attack towards you. After all, you chose to interpret it in that biased way.

3) This entire thread is you criticizing me, and there's plenty of other posts in other threads where you do the same. But apparently, when it's you criticizing other people, it doesn't count as personal attacks.

Don't make such weak lies, they're not working.

4) Says the pot to the kettle. What do you think people would think after they see how you react to criticism of any sort?

5) So you want me to say all sort of nasty little things about you behind your back instead? This isn't middle school.

If we were arguing about the first things I said to you, the argument you make in this point would be valid.....except that was already said and done, in this very thread. Instead we're arguing about me saying, according to you:

0551E80Y wrote:

0551E80Y wrote: SomeoneYouUsedToKnow wrote: Just shamelessly admitting that you have a 1-person circlejerk.

instead of acting like an oversensitive child

instead of crying about If you have the right to criticize my attitude and behavior, it's only fair for others to have the right to criticize yours. Don't be an hypocrite.