Philosophy Now Forum

accelafine wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:08 pm Why has the sole resident troll been allowed to lurk here for so long?

Why are you allowed to keep 'trying to' justify the killing of children and babies, and in fact even be allowed to happily promote the destruction and killing of more children and babies?

Why are you allowed to continually express and spread your absolute hatred of human beings, who you consider are 'others' and 'outside' of 'your group'?

The very thing that you do, here, is what has caused so many wars and killings.

Why are you, also, allowed to write words, and then pass those words off as though another had wrote them?

Also, if you want to consider the just asking of questions, for clarity or challenging sake, only, and asked from a Truly open perspective, only, as 'trolling', then you certainly are not in the Right forum, and place, here.

accelafine wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:16 pm Whose only reason for being on this forum is to annoy everyone he engages with (apart from one man-crazed, bat-shit insane desperado). The very definiton of a textbook internet troll.

But, the definition of a so-called 'textbook internet troll' is different.

And, what you perceive is my only reason for being in this forum is your own personal view and/or belief and opinion, only. I have already expressed the very reasons why 'I' am, here. But, once more, you continually show your inability to read, and to comprehend.
Also, if you fing it 'annoying' being questioned and/or challenged over your obviously very "one-sided" and fixed views or beliefs, then, just maybe, you are not suited for a 'philosophy forum', of all places.

Once more I will suggest you obtained actual irrefutable proof for your views, claims, and beliefs, here, before you even begin to consider sharing them openly, here, in a public forum. I will remind you that you are in a 'philosophy forum', hee, where it is best to expect that can be, and you even will be, critiqued, questioned, and/or challenged over every word and sentence that you put forward, here.

Why is the trolling **** allowed to spread his bullshit, inventing comments that have never been made that he pulls out of his arse and which, amazingly, he has never quoted? You would think that he would have quoted such comments at the time they were made. It almost seems as if he's just a lonely troll who is desperate for attention because he has never had any in his actual life.

accelafine wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:21 pm Imagine a man trying to tell a woman what to think and what opinions she should have when it comes to her own safety and the safety of her sex. Imagine what a gigantic, delusional, lying, trolling **** that man would need to be.

Are you claiming some one does that, here?

If yes, then who is that, exactly?

And, will you provide the actual words that they said and write, here, which led you to believe what you do, here?

If no, then why not?

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:26 pm

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 5:41 pm

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 5:37 pm

What do you mean by 'whole world', here, exactly?

And, how come in your own tiny little narrowed and closed world and perspective of things you believe there are absolutely no victims, at all, from "british terrorists" and "british colonialists"?

I said their were no victims of the British Empire left alive.

'That' is, exactly, what I read, and I am referring to?

Why has your very blinded and closed "one-sided" view and perspective of things not allowed you to recognise and see this very Fact?

In other words why did you go off assuming some thing, here, which is also completely False and Wrong?

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 5:41 pm Can you perhaps work out why?

LOL Just because you, personally, desperately want to believe there is none, does not mean there is.

Obviously you will have to, first, prove that there are none still alive.

'We', now, wait for your irrefutable proof.

Also, why only reply to some, of what I wrote, and not to all of what I wrote, and asked?

Well, they'd have to be pretty old, wouldn't they? And just in case you manage to find any African or Indian centenarians who were once subjects of the empire, the 20th century empire was far more interested in building infrastructure, than exploiting the natives. Indeed it had become a huge financial loss.

Yet the same troll constantly demands 'actual, irrefutable proof' for observations about his own behaviour on here. Something that is abundantly obvious in every single comment he makes. What a ridiculous little turd. What would constitute 'proof' of that?

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:56 pm

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:26 pm

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 5:41 pm

I said their were no victims of the British Empire left alive.

'That' is, exactly, what I read, and I am referring to?

Why has your very blinded and closed "one-sided" view and perspective of things not allowed you to recognise and see this very Fact?

In other words why did you go off assuming some thing, here, which is also completely False and Wrong?

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 5:41 pm Can you perhaps work out why?

LOL Just because you, personally, desperately want to believe there is none, does not mean there is.

Obviously you will have to, first, prove that there are none still alive.

'We', now, wait for your irrefutable proof.

Also, why only reply to some, of what I wrote, and not to all of what I wrote, and asked?

Well, they'd have to be pretty old, wouldn't they?

your very narrowed and closed views and perspectives, here, are, obviously, not allowing you to see fully, nor clearly.

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:56 pm And just in case you manage to find any African or Indian centenarians who were once subjects of the empire, the 20th century empire was far more interested in building infrastructure, than exploiting the natives. Indeed it had become a huge financial loss.

Again, the absolute closedness, biases, and blindness of 'this one' can be very clearly seen and recognized, here.

accelafine wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:01 pm Yet the same troll constantly demands 'actual, irrefutable proof' for observations about his own behaviour on here. Something that is abundantly obvious in every single comment he makes. What a ridiculous little turd. What would constitute 'proof' of that?

Once again, 'this one' is completely and utterly incapable of providing absolutely any thing at all.

Which could make some wonder if 'this one' realises that it is in an actual 'philosophy forum', of all places.

Trolls will keep trolling. Perhaps they should try to find themselves a more constructive hobby--like macrame, or knitting penis covers.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:01 pm

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:56 pm

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:26 pm

'That' is, exactly, what I read, and I am referring to?

Why has your very blinded and closed "one-sided" view and perspective of things not allowed you to recognise and see this very Fact?

In other words why did you go off assuming some thing, here, which is also completely False and Wrong?


LOL Just because you, personally, desperately want to believe there is none, does not mean there is.

Obviously you will have to, first, prove that there are none still alive.

'We', now, wait for your irrefutable proof.

Also, why only reply to some, of what I wrote, and not to all of what I wrote, and asked?

Well, they'd have to be pretty old, wouldn't they?

your very narrowed and closed views and perspectives, here, are, obviously, not allowing you to see fully, nor clearly.

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:56 pm And just in case you manage to find any African or Indian centenarians who were once subjects of the empire, the 20th century empire was far more interested in building infrastructure, than exploiting the natives. Indeed it had become a huge financial loss.

Again, the absolute closedness, biases, and blindness of 'this one' can be very clearly seen and recognized, here.

Do you get a kick out of continually drawing attention to me being blind, by the way? As part of an argument, I mean, as if you're making some sort of point. Not that it bothers me, just curious as to why you would do that.

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:08 pm

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:01 pm

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:56 pm

Well, they'd have to be pretty old, wouldn't they?

your very narrowed and closed views and perspectives, here, are, obviously, not allowing you to see fully, nor clearly.

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 6:56 pm And just in case you manage to find any African or Indian centenarians who were once subjects of the empire, the 20th century empire was far more interested in building infrastructure, than exploiting the natives. Indeed it had become a huge financial loss.

Again, the absolute closedness, biases, and blindness of 'this one' can be very clearly seen and recognized, here.

Do you get a kick out of continually drawing attention to me being blind, by the way? As part of an argument, I mean, as if you're making some sort of point. Not that it bothers me, just curious as to why you would do that.

But I draw attention to everyone who is being blind, here.

I do not do it continually to you more so than any other.

Why do you see, or perceive, that 'I' do it to 'you' more often than 'I' do to 'others'?

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:32 pm

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:08 pm

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:01 pm

your very narrowed and closed views and perspectives, here, are, obviously, not allowing you to see fully, nor clearly.


Again, the absolute closedness, biases, and blindness of 'this one' can be very clearly seen and recognized, here.

Do you get a kick out of continually drawing attention to me being blind, by the way? As part of an argument, I mean, as if you're making some sort of point. Not that it bothers me, just curious as to why you would do that.

But I draw attention to everyone who is being blind, here.

I do not do it continually to you more so than any other.

Why do you see, or perceive, that 'I' do it to 'you' more often than 'I' do to 'others'?

I must be wrong, then.

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:39 pm

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:32 pm

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:08 pm

Do you get a kick out of continually drawing attention to me being blind, by the way? As part of an argument, I mean, as if you're making some sort of point. Not that it bothers me, just curious as to why you would do that.

But I draw attention to everyone who is being blind, here.

I do not do it continually to you more so than any other.

Why do you see, or perceive, that 'I' do it to 'you' more often than 'I' do to 'others'?

I must be wrong, then.

Okay. But, now back to why do you believe, absolutely, that there are no victims of the "british" empire left alive?

Surely, for example, if some one came and stole the house you are living in, from you, and did not allow you to live in 'your home' and forced to live 'another way' that you were used to, and certainly did not want, nor deserve, then this would have a lasting dramatic and negative effect on 'your offspring', if you have any, and in 'the way' that you, and them, 'look at' and 'see' things.

Thus, the victims of what 'that one' did, back then, could continue on for centuries.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:50 pm

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:39 pm

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:32 pm

But I draw attention to everyone who is being blind, here.

I do not do it continually to you more so than any other.

Why do you see, or perceive, that 'I' do it to 'you' more often than 'I' do to 'others'?

I must be wrong, then.

Okay. But, now back to why do you believe, absolutely, that there are no victims of the "british" empire left alive?

Surely, for example, if some one came and stole the house you are living in, from you, and did not allow you to live in 'your home' and forced to live 'another way' that you were used to, and certainly did not want, nor deserve, then this would have a lasting dramatic and negative effect on 'your offspring', if you have any, and in 'the way' that you, and them, 'look at' and 'see' things.

Thus, the victims of what 'that one' did, back then, could continue on for centuries.

As is the case with any other empire, or polity, in history. Let's take slavery as an example. Every empire in history has practiced it, including the British Empire. But only one empire in history has ever changed its mind and done everything in its power to stamp it out across the whole world. Can you guess which one that was?

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:56 pm

Age wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:50 pm

Maia wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 7:39 pm

I must be wrong, then.

Okay. But, now back to why do you believe, absolutely, that there are no victims of the "british" empire left alive?

Surely, for example, if some one came and stole the house you are living in, from you, and did not allow you to live in 'your home' and forced to live 'another way' that you were used to, and certainly did not want, nor deserve, then this would have a lasting dramatic and negative effect on 'your offspring', if you have any, and in 'the way' that you, and them, 'look at' and 'see' things.

Thus, the victims of what 'that one' did, back then, could continue on for centuries.

As is the case with any other empire, or polity, in history. Let's take slavery as an example. Every empire in history has practiced it, including the British Empire. But only one empire in history has ever changed its mind and done everything in its power to stamp it out across the whole world. Can you guess which one that was?

Who cares?

you are, very clearly, 'trying to' deflect, here, now.

Look, you obviously made a claim above, here, based on a 'current' belief of yours . I am just trying to figure out why you believe, absolutely, that there are no victims of the "british" empire left alive.

you might not want to delve into this, and express why you believe such a Falsehood, but you 'trying to' detract and deflect, here, now, is just another form of deception, which obviously does not look good upon you.