Re:Gun owners’ private information leaked by California Atto...
by mulmen on Tuesday June 28, 2022 @06:03PM
(#31913658)
> You're trying to attribute arguments to me that I never made, and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop.
I explicitly did the exact opposite of that.
You are clearly confused but at this point I don’t think I can help you.
Re:Gun owners’ private information leaked by California Atto...
by falcrist on Tuesday June 28, 2022 @08:41PM
(#31915054)
No. You did exactly that. I'm asking you politely to please stop that and the condescension. It's ineffective and rude.
Re:Gun owners’ private information leaked by California Atto...
by mulmen on Tuesday June 28, 2022 @09:31PM
(#31915413)
You’re clearly still confused and I think that’s why you are being defensive.
I replied to sha256sum’s (not you!) comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31912312 with a rhetorical question. You then answered it as if it were an actual question. Since that wasn’t the reason for the question I then explained my interpretation of the original post (that again, you did not make).
Since that point you seem to believe I claimed sha256sum’s post was yours but in fact I did no such thing and actually disclaimed it specifically.
Re:Gun owners’ private information leaked by California Atto...
by falcrist on Wednesday June 29, 2022 @09:33AM
(#31919880)
No. I'm clearly not confused. I know who you replied to. I'm not responding to them.
I'm tired of the disingenuous way you've approached this conversation, and your awful attitude.
As I said in my last comment, you need to cut it out.
As far as your rhetorical device, I'm sorry but theft isn't the only way firearms get into that market.
You're trying to attribute arguments to me that I never made, and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop.
Thanks.