[ SECRET POST #6015 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6015 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.
[Cursed Princess Club]



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 37 secrets from Secret Submission Post #860.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

DA

I figured that anon was being sarcastic.

[(Anonymous)]

Bingo.

anti-tagging anon up there sounds just like the anti-gay bigots.


We can't have a general standard of tagging, otherwise every person on the planet will expect ME personally to manage their emotions for them!

We can't have gay marriage, otherwise I will be forced by the government to change my gender and sleep with a dog!

This is what you sound like, dude. It's called the slippery slope fallacy. A fallacy is a failure in reasoning which renders an argument invalid.

[(Anonymous)]

"People have to tag for unreality, otherwise we won't be allowed to tag for gore and rape!"

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

No one has said you HAVE to tag. The whole point of the original secret is that they don't BELIEVE anyone who says they need it.

"I don't believe people who say they need 'unreality' tags" is the same thing as

"I don't believe people who say they need 'rape' tags."


You don't HAVE to tag for rape. We just all understand that people who don't are dicks.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

But I think you're both making compatible points. "Don't assume this tag is uniquely bullshit compared to everything else people benefit from having tagged" is fair. "Don't turn 'I like having this tagged' into a moral imperative for what other fans have to do" is also fair.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Maybe. It could be that they don't ACTUALLY mean that any request will turn into an attempt to control and subjugate people. But that's what they said.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, just like it could be that anon above didn't ACTUALLY mean that supporting gay marriage will lead to bestiality. But that's what they said.

[(Anonymous)]

Have you not been reading this thread?


We can't allow gay marriage! Next it will be bestiality!!!1!eleventy!!1 They're exactly the same! I am very smart.


You think someone who ACTUALLY means that wrote "!!!1!eleventy!!1" ??

DA

I figured that anon was being sarcastic.

Bingo.

anti-tagging anon up there sounds just like the anti-gay bigots.

And that exchange? Where they say they're being sarcastic? Could you please go back and read these?

[(Anonymous)]

Whoa, are you suggesting that people could say things that they don't actually mean in order to make a point????

[(Anonymous)]

Oooh so you're a troll.

I was wondering why you were getting so angry about the idea that someone might possibly ask you to tag something. It's not like you'd lose your job, or your house, or your family if you decided to just not. People just think you're an asshole.

But you're a troll, of course you're an asshole! Mystery solved!

[(Anonymous)]

Seems like you're a troll, yourself, since you're willing to throw gay people under the bus in order to make a point.

[(Anonymous)]

Try again.

[(Anonymous)]

And during Pride Month, too.

[(Anonymous)]

“I draw the line at tagging for flashing lights. No one needs that!”

[(Anonymous)]

"It is literally impossible to draw lines! Having any boundaries or standards at all is problematic!"

[(Anonymous)]

NA

"It's literally impossible to not be a dick and not cause other people to have seizures with no warning and asking me to is controlling and manupulative!"

[(Anonymous)]

"There is no discernable difference between the tag 'flashing lights' and 'unreality!' If people don't tag obvious parodies as 'unreality,' people will have seizures!"

[(Anonymous)]

They can definitely have episodes of not recognizing reality, which is also a feature of some kinds of seizures, so I'm glad you recognize that. Good job!

[(Anonymous)]

No one has seizures from reading lies on the internet, anon. Be real.

[(Anonymous)]

Please read that sentence again. Cause... I didn't say that. Would you like some recommendations for remedial reading comprehension classes?

[(Anonymous)]

In response to the suggestion that people will have seizures if a lie isn't tagged with "unreality," you said that people who have seizures can have episodes of not recognizing reality. If your intent isn't to argue that people may have seizures if they read an untagged lie on the internet, you're going to have to explain your poor attempt at being clever.

[(Anonymous)]

Nah. You've already demonstrated that you need a bit more remedial education, and I'm not getting paid to be your teacher.

[(Anonymous)]

Anon, I'm not asking you for a lesson -- I'm asking you for a cogent argument. So far, all you've done is engage in sophistry.

[(Anonymous)]

Oooh an SAT word. Too bad it's the wrong word.

[(Anonymous)]

It's exactly the right word. You're using cleverness in place of real argument.