Skitzocow Chris Gillon / Autphag and Spergchan / Sophie Y’Israeli - Autistic North Koreaboo, Also a Man

[LagoonaBlue]

it's even more hilarious that you would use any quote of Orwell's (hopelessly out of context) to attempt to characterise my writing.

I can tell you now, you certainly aren't Goethe or Shakespeare.

 

[Autphag]

I can tell you now, you certainly aren't Goethe or Shakespeare.

None of you write originally, whether it is Cuntster sounding like a methed-out journalist of the KCNA, you sounding like a low end British tabloid, or S-chan coming off as a badly written scientific study abstract. Give me a break. The rest of you just kind of read off like a mixture of 4chan Anons and YT comment section screeds. There is no consistently "literary" standard of composition employed here.

 

[LagoonaBlue]

None of you write originally, whether it is Cuntster sounding like a methed-out journalist of the KCNA, you sounding like a low end British tabloid, or S-chan coming off as a badly written scientific study abstract. Give me a break. The rest of you just kind of read off like a mixture of 4chan Anons and YT comment section screeds. There is no consistently "literary" standard of composition employed here.

I am well above the shite published in The Sun and the Daily Record.

I'm going to stop insulting you because insulting you will only make me feel worse.

 

[Cuntster]

None of you write originally, whether it is Cuntster sounding like a methed-out journalist of the KCNA, you sounding like a low end British tabloid, or S-chan coming off as a badly written scientific study abstract. Give me a break. The rest of you just kind of read off like a mixture of 4chan Anons and YT comment section screeds. There is no consistently "literary" standard of composition employed here.

The difference is writing is a crucial part of my job, I get *paid* to write, and when that's the case then yes, there is a literary standard one must adhere to. I agree, there is no literary standard when it comes posting in forums, however there is a social standard that's implied. The purpose of a post on a forum is to be read by others usually without prior knowledge regarding the level of comprehension possessed by the reader. So, it makes sense to use simple, clear language to engage as many people as possible, to get your 'point' across to a wider audience. Unless you're in a specifically technical forum, vomiting out overly-verbose prose only has one purpose; to posture.

Of course this is now entering the realms of social intercourse, which you lack any concept of. One just needs to watch a video of you to realize you hide behind your walls of text and jargon to appear intelligent, a textual shield of sorts. Your use of unnecessarily complex language is a way for you to separate yourself from the 'morons'; obviously the only reason why people don't imitate your writing style is because they're stupid, right? Very sad.

But it's a facade. When engaged with in-person you're a complete mess, rambling and using words out of context. In fact, it speaks volumes that you stumble awkwardly over complex words when speaking, and mostly stick to normal, everyday language. Your real life use of language doesn't begin to match your online usage. Posturing, fake, facade. These words sum it up.

 

[QT 219]

In other words, Orwell was so hopeless at interpreting the works of his contemporaries that he had the tenacity to engage in a pseudointellectual tardrage where, disguised under a meaningful dismissal of their meaning, he tacitly admits to having a deficient enough discernment as to be completely bereft of critical literary comprehension.

His proto-postmodernist tard rages are (were?) like Cuntster trying to explain autism through his monoculturally negroid prism of perception; it falls under that same folly alleged in his charges of the pseudopolemic critique of others.

And considering none of you properly interpreted that he was attacking the writing styles more properly characterised by your stilted overscientificness (not that it changes my position -- a hack is still a hack), it's even more hilarious that you would use any quote of Orwell's (hopelessly out of context) to attempt to characterise my writing.

>refuting someone's obvious skill with language is "pseudointellectual tardrage"

Your rabid insistence in trying to prove you are not dumb, only continues to prove that you are.

 

[Rat Speaker]

Cuntster trying to explain autism through his monoculturally negroid prism of perception;

whether it is Cuntster sounding like a methed-out journalist of the KCNA

Lol calm down feg.

 

[LagoonaBlue]

When engaged with in-person.

Wait, do you know Aut irl?

 

[Cuntster]

Wait, do you know Aut irl?

Not really.

 

[Autphag]

The difference is writing is a crucial part of my job, I get *paid* to write.

That you're a pathological liar is revealed when you redefine hour line of work this many times. Typical negroid scam artist. Why do you even bother convincing us that you're not subhuman in your attempt to emulate apishly remotely human thought patterns and speech?

Not really.

Of course not. Like everything else you write, it is simply a personal test at how far you can stretch the bounds of fiction. You're a compulsive liar now by admission.

>refuting someone's obvious skill with language is "pseudointellectual tardrage"

Your rabid insistence in trying to prove you are not dumb, only continues to prove that you are.

You don't even know what you're saying. Orwell was in no positon to refute anybody's skill in language with how he wrote. He was a hack. Stop getting butthurt over the contemptuous dismissal of literary demagogues righly earned by them. Also if you want to even appear as having the semblance of post-retsrdation intellect, I would stop unintentionally forming tautologies if I was you.

 

[Begemot]

You don't even know what you're saying. Orwell was in no positon to refute anybody's skill in language with how he wrote. He was a hack. Stop getting butthurt over the contemptuous dismissal of literary demagogues righly earned by them. Also if you want to even appear as having the semblance of post-retsrdation intellect, I would stop unintentionally forming tautologies if I was you.

He was one of the most cogent writers on the Spanish civil war. Also pretending your 789chan thread about Benjamin N didn't consist of mewling self-pity is quite disingenuous.

 

[Autphag]

He was one of the most cogent writers on the Spanish civil war. Also pretending your 789chan thread about Benjamin N didn't consist of mewling self-pity is quite disingenuous.

I don't even care about any of that. I was trying to settle to sleep and I couldn't. I was laugjing myself senseless over thinking about the real person behind the ostensibly eloqueny but in fact rather stupid person behind the persona "Cuntster": one Amber. He has, in this thread, gone through a number of metamorphoses in the relating of his autobiographical details that render any semi-serious contention he has to raise absolutely ludicrous. This is a transsexual prostitute who probably really only otherwise subsists off a trust fund --and the introman narrative on who Amber is is the one I'd default to as the most reliable -- pretending to be a psychiatric doctorate, expert on autism, GCHQ employee and retard wrangling coordinator of some variety; the implausibility of all of these things being simultaneously true just makes it particularly hilarious that this transvestiic fetishist on steroids can elicit the belief of a credulis user base in his constructed imsge just by appealing to an imagined superiority of the neugrotypical social awareness in his diatribical attacks against me, with no reference in reality except to his own internally imagined conception of me. That he has gotten you fatuous retards to accept this as a form of objective analysis is a source of unending hilarity to me. Tha j you!

 

[Begemot]

I don't even care about any of that. I was trying to settle to sleep and I couldn't. I was laugjing myself senseless over thinking about the real person behind the ostensibly eloqueny but in fact rather stupid person behind the persona "Cuntster": one Amber. He has, in this thread, gone through a number of metamorphoses in the relating of his autobiographical details that render any semi-serious contention he has to raise absolutely ludicrous. This is a transsexual prostitute who probably really only otherwise subsists off a trust fund --and the introman narrative on who Amber is is the one I'd default to as the most reliable -- pretending to be a psychiatric doctorate, expert on autism, GCHQ employee and exceptional individual wrangling coordinator of some variety; the implausibility of all of these things being simultaneously true just makes it particularly hilarious that this transvestiic fetishist on steroids can elicit the belief of a credulis user base in his constructed imsge just by appealing to an imagined superiority of the neugrotypical social awareness in his diatribical attacks against me, with no reference in reality except to his own internally imagined conception of me. That he has gotten you fatuous exceptional individuals to accept this as a form of objective analysis is a source of unending hilarity to me. Tha j you!

They aren't a lolcow, though. That's on you.

 

[Autphag]

They aren't a lolcow, though. That's on you.

He isn't. You're right. However it does mean that a congenitally retarded negroid scam artist had managed to make lolcows out of all of you...

 

[Begemot]

He isn't. You're right. However it does mean that a congenitally exceptional negroid scam artist had managed to make lolcows out of all of you...

Perception matters. They haven't created a public persona.

 

[Cuck Norris]

In other words, Orwell was so hopeless at interpreting the works of his contemporaries that he had the tenacity to engage in a pseudointellectual tardrage where, disguised under a meaningful dismissal of their meaning, he tacitly admits to having a deficient enough discernment as to be completely bereft of critical literary comprehension.

His proto-postmodernist tard rages are (were?) like Cuntster trying to explain autism through his monoculturally negroid prism of perception; it falls under that same folly alleged in his charges of the pseudopolemic critique of others.

And considering none of you properly interpreted that he was attacking the writing styles more properly characterised by your stilted overscientificness (not that it changes my position -- a hack is still a hack), it's even more hilarious that you would use any quote of Orwell's (hopelessly out of context) to attempt to characterise my writing.

Perhaps Einstein is preferable to Orwell then? "If you cannot explain it to a six year old, you do not understand it yourself."

 

[Autphag]

Perhaps Einstein is preferable to Orwell then? "If you cannot explain it to a six year old, you do not understand it yourself."

Except I've done this consistently, only to prove that most of you are beneath the par of average six year olds.

 

[Cuck Norris]

Except I've done this consistently, only to prove that most of you are beneath the par of average six year olds.

You have not. You have done nothing but post verbose stream of consciousness bullshit to try to sound smart. Last time I checked six year olds don't use words and phrases like "contemporaries", "pseudointellectual", "discernment", "proto-postmodernist", "monoculturally", "pseudopolemic", "overscientificness" (lol this isn't even a word).

And that's from a SINGLE post. You can't explain anything because if you break it down into simple terms you realize you sound like a petulant child, because that is what you are. A bratty manchild that can't accept his mental illness.

 

[Trombonista]

The better part of my adolescrnCe was spent cramming dictionaries for fun.

Bullshit. That was my adolescence and I never make the spelling mistakes you do.

 

[Pikimon]

Except I've done this consistently, only to prove that most of you are beneath the par of average six year olds.

What do you think will be your lasting legacy to the world?

How have you made the world a better place?

Do you feel happy with where you are in your life right now?

 

[Begemot]

Except I've done this consistently, only to prove that most of you are beneath the par of average six year olds.

No, we're mostly not rank fantasists and layabouts, mate.