Nostr Web Client

nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq4pa5q2kqs8ygfxuat02w88ezsle9wzwnu0meu7z2785t8rl0hhcsahhd4m oh that lol, it just seemed like an obvious joke rather than an actual question (like, as obvious as a joke could possibly be)

in any case, if it really isn't a joke, the answer to that can be obtained by just reading the bio section you're talking about to begin with

i word nearly everything i say very meticulously (for example, that "nearly everything" rather than "everything" exists primarily as a CYA clause), so you don't have to guess what i mean, what i say is nearly always what i actually mean

Scoundrel 7mo ago

I enjoy presenting things in a funny way, but those are my genuine beliefs. Is there something inconsistent or wrong in my beliefs that's leading you to think they are a joke?

I read your bio section very carefully. The reason I'm asking you if you stand by your claims is because the conclusions in my particular case seem very odd. Your bio seems to imply that I am an anti-contact fundamentalist even though my anti-contact beliefs aren't fundamental and only apply because of specific reasoning. Your bio also seems to imply that I am an anti even though I am a content pedophile and believe that children are objectively hot.

Am I reading your bio section properly? Are you trying to use terms like "fundamentalist" or "anti" the same way I have heard other people using those terms?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.