Yesterday I had a chat on Discord with some Blurt friends. I received encouragement and a few suggestions on how to deal with you. I was also given a fable. I will quote this one later.
You had accused me of not being able to have a factual discussion.
I have proven often enough on all platforms our blockchains that I am able to have factual and constructive discussions. I have made several suggestions that have contributed greatly to the well-being of Blurt.
You wrote it yourself many times that I have done a lot for Blurt.
You, on the other hand, have done nothing for Blurt.
Now you have written many lies about me in many comments for months.
Again and again you tell the same story of the conflicts that happened on Blurt.
The problem is that your story is simply wrong in many parts. You are missing a lot of information and you unfortunately lack the ability to understand the big context.
Even though your best friend here on the platform has told you several times that you're not telling the story right, you still keep writing the same wrong sentences like an organ grinder. You are simply unteachable and stubborn.
You are the one who is unable to have a factual discussion. You think up random things and then write them as if they were facts.
I have repeatedly refuted your false statements.
I often stand for exactly the opposite of what you imply. Just one example: Although I had the most PB, I always stood up for the limitation of the "power" of big accounts. You either didn't read all that or forgot.
The real motivation from you to keep writing lies about me is that you're jealous and that in return you'll get strong votes from a co-founder who has your head in his ass.
But, it also seems that you now believe the false story of conflict on Blurt yourself, since you have written it so many times.
Because of that and your disgusting character, you are not worth wasting just one more second of my time on you. That was also what my friends advised me to do yesterday.
So I won't read your postings anymore.
You say I am a tyrant and a hypocrite and the grass is blue.
I say you're either a liar, or you're very mentally ill, or you're a bought puppet, and I say the grass is green.
Now here comes the fable:
"The donkey said to the tiger:
"The grass is blue."
The tiger replied:
"No, the grass is green!"
A quarrel broke out and they went to the king of the animals, the lion, to settle their differences.
When the donkey reached the place where the lion was sitting on his throne, he began to shout:
"Your Majesty, is it true that the grass is blue?"
The lion replied:
"Yes, of course the grass is blue."
The donkey was delighted and continued:
"The tiger is contradicting me and annoying me, please punish him."
The king (lion) announced:
"The tiger will be punished with one month of silence."
The donkey jumped happily and went on contentedly, repeating:
"The grass is blue ... the grass is blue ..."
The tiger accepted his punishment and asked the lion:
"Your Majesty, what have you punished me for? After all, the grass is green?"
Lion:
"The grass is indeed green."
The surprised tiger asked:
"Then why are you punishing me?"
Lion:
"It has nothing to do with whether grass is blue or green. The punishment for being a brave and intelligent animal like you must not waste time arguing with a donkey and then wasting my time with this stupid question.
The most terrible waste of time is to argue with a fool and a bore who cares neither for truth nor reality, but only for the victory of his beliefs and illusions.
Do not waste time with useless arguments.
There are people who can't accept the truth because it doesn't fit into their worldview, they prefer to defend the lie and mock the one who points out the lie.
They just want to assert themselves. At the same time they are blinded by hatred and the discussion is accompanied by insults.
When ignorance cries out, the spirit is silent."
And the moral of the story:
I will be silent now.
I remember a story about two ambitious yeshiva students arguing to an impasse.
They both agreed to settle their dispute by consulting a wise old rabbi.
The first student feverishly made their case to the wise old rabbi and the rabbi nodded thoughtfully and said, "you're right".
The second student, unfazed, stepped up and laid out their own argument, making sure not to skip over any critical points of doctrine, and when they had exhausted their rhetoric, the wise old rabbi nodded thoughtfully and said, "you're right".
Now the students couldn't fathom how both arguments could possibly be considered correct and implored the wise old rabbi for some sort of satisfactory explanation.
Well, it's rather simple really, the wise old rabbi began slowly, if you accept the first student's axioms, then their conclusions follow logically. And if you accept the second student's axioms, then their conclusions follow logically.
You two forgot to negotiate your axioms.
I wasn't seeking to negotiate. I was seeking to be a rock. :)