Pigg said

will PROBABLY see some in this very thread.

It happened sooner than I thought!  

Of course it did.

F1 = -F2

King Lucem Ferre said

So she gets called out for acting like a typical alt-right (by the way, believing this Q conspiracy shit IS alt-right even if you guys aren’t quite the raging bigots the group is filled with) and your reaction is admitting that your opinions and comebacks are born purely out of spite.

 

Like, if she wasn’t alt-right why would she need to react to the thread in the way she did in the first place? If it wasn’t about her she reacted like the shoe fit obviously in a way that the videos predicted sooo…

Quit acting phony? Quit acting like she’s the victim pushing back?  

Not a victim. Just a proportional pushback (as we perceive it) to counteract left leaning politics. The easy way to prevent the pushback posting that we do is to not post about politics. About Q, I thought I explained the whole thing before. She doesn’t even follow anything Q at all. It is done for the “equal but opposite reaction”. It doesn’t even have to be equal in terms of frequency or substance as long as the complimentary proportions of the argument vectors are congruent because…

{ F1 = -F2  & F = MA } ∴ { M1A1 = – ( M2A2 ) ≡ ( M1 ∝ A2 ≅ A1 ∝ M2 ) } ∵ { F1 + F2 ≐ 0 }
The 3 laws in perfect balance for 0 sum.

Pigg said
Why did she assume I was talking about HER when I mentioned Alt-Right?

 

It’s not like either of you actually watched the videos before commenting anyway.  

From the convo I had with her about your post, she didn’t assume that. But you did seem to assume that she thought you were talking about her. It was just a pushback to a leftist post. The content and poster did not matter. I do the same thing on here. 

If it was one video around 3 minutes or so, I would have watched it but that many video that are that long are not going to get viewed by me. I clicked on some of them and instantly hit stop when I say the time length.

I would think you would know by now, unless you don’t read her reply posts to many of the political topics (we do exactly that a lot of the times), we don’t always reply to the topic or counter the subject, just post something opposite on the spectrum. It may or may not be related to the convo at hand.

Pigg said

Psyral Infection said:

I would think you would know by now, unless you don’t read her reply posts to many of the political topics (we do exactly that a lot of the times), we don’t always reply to the topic or counter the subject, just post something opposite on the spectrum. It may or may not be related to the convo at hand.  

Why?  

I explained it with an analogous reference to Newton’s 3 laws balanced, specifically by the corollary of his 3rd, to produce a 0 Sum.

{ F1 = -F2  & F = MA } ∴ { M1A1 = – ( M2A2 ) ≡ ( M1 ∝ A2 ≅ A1 ∝ M2 ) } ∵ { F1 + F2 ≐ 0 }

I started with just the simple 3rd in my 1st post but kept expanding it in subsequent posts since it didn’t seem that anyone picked up my analogy. The above formula is both mathematically consistent and mathematically complete from a constraint satisfaction standpoint. My current project I am involved with deals with constraint satisfaction problem domains regressed to boolean representation so it is my current way of thinking until I complete it and move on to a new project. It is a major project with the biggest stumbling point trying to reduce the algorithms to polynomial instead of logarithmic complexity. It’s that whole P=NP vs P!=NP thing.