Serve truth and justice: address these matters NOW.

It's time to dust off the old stuff, eh? That's fine. dd bs=1 skip=21504 of="embedded.tar" if="fb8364cb579c57bbd3310bd342c5e235.png"

>>63393 > I haven't forgotten your retarded death threats towards the staff, either. Considering how strongly the administration here has in the past tried—and continues to try—to suppress certain information, I would not be surprised in the least if some among them are somehow involved in the very matters against which I've been fighting for far too long. I have no regrets.

>>63423 >I would not be surprised in the least if some among them are somehow involved in the very matters against which I've been fighting for far too long. You've finally figured it out. I'm coming to anally devastate you. Prepare your anus.

I started learning Latin nearly two years ago. What have you done in that time? How are you fighting anything by posting here?

>>63424 Very funny But seriously, some far-too-popular left-leaning chans do have some remarkably similar characteristics in common. Suppression of certain material—particularly material covering important matters applying to many people to which I am (and for much too long have been) trying to draw attention—is one of them. Ignoring the text about logically-fallacious diversionary tactics is another. At the end of the day I'm merely a very fed-up heterosexual male agnostic atheist with an aesthetic anus fetish. Nothing about me truly matters especially in comparison to the issues I'm trying to convince many people to seriously and effectively address. People who continue to insist otherwise and/or try to make this about me are very likely to have a nefarious agenda.

>>63426 > Ignoring the text about logically-fallacious diversionary tactics is another. Speaking of that... >>63425 Logically-fallacious diversionary tactics: • A red herring is a tangential topic introduced intentionally as a distraction or inadvertently. Trying to create an unrelated discussion about a messenger or claimant (e.g. by introducing alleged personal attributes or asking about unstated opinions) is one _very_ common example. • An ad hominem logical fallacy involves arguing or implying that some supposed attribute(s) of a messenger or source somehow affects the validity of one or more claims presented when any such characteristic is completely irrelevant — and this is nonsensical for cases in which information originates from others. (Sometimes such characteristics can be relevant: For example, it may be appropriate to question someone's honesty when she makes a claim about herself or her own experiences. However, a better idea may be to mention the anecdotal evidence logical fallacy, i.e. favoring some personal anecdote(s) over evidence based on science and logic.) • Misrepresentation—introducing a distorted version of something—is another means of creating a diversion. Attacking a fabrication in order to suggest refutal of what was actually presented constitutes a straw man logical fallacy. (A refutation featuring one or more vague, sweeping claims without proof may be related. The burden of proof rests on the claimant.) It is suggestive of a nefarious agenda and/or psychopathy to purposely and repeatedly try to draw attention away from ano rectal anatomy and physiology, rampant ano rectal violence, associated traumatic risks, and an epidemic of ignorance and misinformation. These topics, plus the voluminous amount of information from others, are far more important than anything about a lone person trying to raise awareness of them. It is very likely that pornography industries utilize psychopaths as deceitful and manipulative "psyop" agents when some pornography companies already make use of them for perpetration of violence against one or more others.

Anyway, people here can expect much more "spam" and much less interaction and OC (original content) from myself going forward. This site has a _very_ well-earned place on my sh itlist.

>>63428 >much less interaction and OC (original content) from myself going forward nothing of value was lost

>>63393 > I haven't forgotten your retarded death threats towards the staff, either. Oh, and for the record, I'm pretty sure I never actually made any such threats. I may have suggested that administration members should be killed or something like that, but I never wrote something like "I'm going to kill you!" Not that it matters either way.