Good for him. Imagine teaming up with Triagonal, who dismisses documented evidence, including archived webpages of their own behavior toward minors as mere "rumors", and acts as if evidence somehow expires once it's been cited.
He did his homework, saw through Triagonal's rambling and gaslighting, and wanted no association with a 26-year-old self-described machiavellian who spends all day of every day feeling sorry for themselves and talking to themselves on alts, impersonated one of their own siblings, stalks and lusts after minors, and is estranged from their own siblings for good reason. What Triagonal still refuses to learn is that actions have consequences.
Meanwhile, most of Triagonal's supposed "slanderers" (read: people who call out Triagonal's misconduct and slander) are living far happier, more productive lives than Triagonal ever will.
Stay classy and NEVER contact the subject of a PSA. Report, block, and move on. This information is here so you can proactively protect your
I take it there are several shades of slander you're not comprehending. I understand by now, after a bajillion exchanges with this "Triagonal" that make you seem like a broken record, that she isn't saying nothing happened and that she is saying the nuance of the supposed guilt is going through one of your ears and out the other.
Because of how relentless you, your friends, and possibly everyone observing this conversation thinking your side is the side to take are, let me burst that bubble with an analogy, which I will use to explain it like you're five.
This is tank man. You may have heard of him.
So, I know other users have previously uploaded this video, but I couldn't find a version that features as much of the available raw footage
This happened in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese equivalent to Times Square. This was from June 3rd and June 4th of 1989.
To this day, the Chinese government frowns upon people talking in depth about it. There are memes too about it. You might find people repeating "nothing happened in Tiananmen Square" as a joke, but also you might find people in China using workarounds to portray the massacre, such as drawing giant inflatable ducks walking down the road it's on.
You see that? That is censorship.
Is planning out a drawing of the event with giant inflatable ducks worth a felony charge? No. Do people do it? Yes, ones who feel so compelled it's like a hole in their heart. But does that make it a priority? No. Which is why, deep down, most people like you wouldn't. And here is where I say "exactly".
Does China ban people from other countries who do this? Yes. Even in the way I'm doing right now. If you go there, and they find out, you are either deported or imprisoned. They can even do it based on incomplete proof, which means now anyone falsely accused of being any of us are now at risk if we went there. But is it someone's right to point fingers? Exactly.
Is it gaslighting to say nothing happened? Yes. But was it gaslighting when a part of the narrative became that those responsible changed? Was it gaslighting when a part of the narrative became that there was more context involved in that, and that the tank drivers weren't going out of their way to commit an atrocity? Was it gaslighting when a part of the narrative became that not every participant in the events were participants in the atrocities and that people exaggerate the guilt of the tank drivers in their minds? Was it gaslighting when a part of the narrative became that the gang of four was responsible for permeating Mao's decisions? Was it gaslighting when a part of the narrative became that the video has misleading elements that makes it unusable as proof that this happened as was portrayed? Would you judge someone who, in their youth, was a part of the cultural revolution, but who, in their later years, became your next door neighbor?
All of these questions and their complex answers are a feature and not a bug of history, and it would be more alien to be avoidant of that kind of respect for all events.
What I'm getting at is every single bit of logic spoken by Triagonal to you is something you treat as alien to anyone you think of as having a good sense of judgement, and yet the opposite approach is codified in their mindset popularly known dilemmas. You normally would not do one. Why do the other?
I am curious about your take (and the take of certain kiwifarms members who are watching) on whether the Tiananmen Square events happened, are deserving of being the inspiration for a crusade on Chinese officials, and were handled properly by the Chinese; please do tell me without telling me (in what many would call litmus test style).
I just may be ready to make sure all of you get the sought-after reaction from China.
This message was the brainchild of Triagonal, who, true to her word about not dangling events over people just for the sake of it, does not believe China should be crusaded Liz Fong-Jones style (or that it isn't ridiculous that kiwifarms feels compelled to treat her like Moby Dick) or that anything actually happened in Tiananmen Square. And her reblogged response to this will cement this.
No amount of bizarre rambling about China and internet drama on your alts will win you sympathy for a downfall that you brought entirely upon yourself.
That moment when these interactions are so predictable at this point that one side can entice the needed response out of the other side in order to de facto confirm that the answering side would support doing something that a whole country is known to ban people for supporting (or even being the kind of person to support it), with the answering side not even realizing that and instead thinking it was just a ramble meant to garner sympathy in a conflict where their reaction is already overblown.
Just replace "joke" with "good analogy that was badly articulated that doubled as an approach to attain @casualxlfanatic and his KiwiFarms friends a ban from China and all things that come out of China".
This is actually kind of amusing to find played out, to be honest.
TLDR: If you don't understand it, it would be like if you had a crush on someone who you wouldn't want seeing you as someone who was willing to lie to them but who there was a chance could see you lying to someone you don't like, a variant of which has also happened before.
