The ONLY part you found objectionable is also what you called a positive.

You are avoiding questions given the fact that I directly asked them and you won’t answer them.

Obviously incorrect. I already told you what they were (sometimes repeatedly), and you have been avoiding them so far. You just do this instead of answering because you choose not to answer.

So what you’re saying is that you fully intend to just play dumb to avoid answering rather than answer.

Those that you’re still refusing to answer

So you’re just whining about being caught in your silly dodging, but still refuse to explain why you are so uncomfortable answering questions about your stance on the issue

Obviously I’m doing no such thing. The no one part was specifically referencing something other than the part I actually asked about.

So you make no attempt whatsoever to address what I ACTUALLY posted.

You were posting about anyone and no one...that’s pretty clearly discussing people beyond yourself.

That’s not an honest statement. No one other than you would know, and the reason is that you refused to specify.

And? Would you really use that in relation to breaking the law?

Why are you avoiding the questions? I never claimed that you said you were speaking about others.

You obviously didn’t think that through. Your previous unwillingness to even answer that simple and basic question was solely your choice. I didn’t have anything to do with it. Stating that something is objectionable to some doesn’t answer whether or not it is objectionable to YOU. Why does that confuse you. It…

You weren’t asked if you would have no objections without the sentence reduction. You are directly misrepresenting what was asked for no other reason that you still don’t want to answer questions.

“Because if you post the whole thing, that refers to the REDUCED SENTENCE part being objectionable.” Which just so happens to be the exact part you were asked about...the part you just keep refusing to answer. Your refusal to answer is no fault or misrepresentation on my part. Learn some personal responsibility. Your…

This is what you posted:

That you fail to grasp the fact that people can and do discuss what others find objectionable does not alter that fact.

“That is what is objectionable.”

My question hasn’t been answered because you steadfastly refuse to answer it. I don’t care if someone else finds it objectionable. I’m asking YOU. That you continue to play dumb just to avoid answering certainly isn’t saying anything good

You’re being blatantly dishonest. You directly lied about my post. I didn’t say that ‘it wouldn’t be that negative’. I pointed out that getting the $500,000 is a positive. Your inability to grasp the fact that positives and neutrals are not magically negatives simply because some positive thing exists is solely…