>I take it you changing the subject means you aren't satisfied with me admitting I was wrong. That's not terribly a big deal they're both blue balls and Chips has been gone for a while. I think people explicitly saying that doxxing can be justified might be more important to you. SBBH are narrative builders so having a standard of doxxing bad actors sounds neat, but SBBH already brands people anyway. That idea could be easily used to justify doxxing by them. Maybe jokes can get people to that point, but that involves slowly wearing people down. We'll have more time before that strategy causes trouble, assuming it works. >I don't think you thinking it's a joke means specifically that you don't share the sentiment, but I don't respect your lack of an ability to see what I see. Calling people toddlers doesn't help your cause. Being against a joke and calling yourself the adult in the room just makes you look uptight. That makes it difficult for people to see you as having good intent rather than a huge ego. As one with a huge ego myself, if that's how you want to be I don't think there's space for two of us. >Agreeing to disagree isn't beneath me. It shouldn't be beneath you. I'm (rightfully) egotistical. Many things are beneath me.