you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 5 months ago (11 children)

They said “can” not “have to”. You changed what they said and then attacked that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 5 months ago (10 children)

    Explain what relevance even mentioning it has here, then, if not this?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    Because it's a fact relevant to the discussion at hand?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 5 months ago* (8 children)

    A brute force assertion doesn't do anything.

    How is it relevant?

    It's only relevance is in him trying to encourage it the way I see it; if you disagree, explain the relevance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago* (5 children)

    The reason to mention it is to explain that people overcome this hurdle in many different ways, one of them is intoxicants. So other people struggle with this in the same way, they just have other means to go about it.

    It's not meant to encourage drinking, it's meant to tell you that a bunch of people are regularly getting drunk in order to handle it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (4 children)

    That's fine I suppose my major irk is with the idea that you are somehow bound to be masking with everyone, which I don't think is true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    It sure as hell isn't I can tell you from experience, and I don't think that's the point of the comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    The original comment I was responding to:

    You're gonna wear a bit of a mask with everyone, whether you're aware of it or not.

    It's a pretty firm statement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments