HelluvaHoax!
Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Glad you liked it! You are if anything, consistent, You don't like my posts nor my cut and pastes and especially my videos. I post a definition that applies and you rail against it. I make commentary that is contrary to your viewpoint and you don't like it. When I post that you don't like my responses, you deny that you disliked my post.
I guess it comes down to this:
HH's tribe - Policy #1
Mimsey is wrong.
Policy #2
Must stop Mimsey at all costs, yet appear measured and graceful, inciteful, humorous, intelligent, sarcastic in a PC, meaningful way that boosts my own status as a raconteur par excellence.
Policy #3
If Mimsey posts anything that makes HH wrong, or has a grain of truth to it, it must be disavowed, stamped out, though peppered with token appreciation so as not to alienate my extensive fan base, which is way bigger than that of Mimsey's, because he is a narrow minded, progressive, liberal, socialistic, climate change denier scum who alleges Woo Woo spiritual experiences and tries to convince others they actually happened when we all know that it's just nuts.
Policy #4
If I, HH, can't find holes in his post's premise, his spelling and grammar is so god awful there is always something to find there to misdirect my fan base of readers away from his points.
Did I miss anything? Do I get a high five? Time for breakfast. Ta ta,
Highest ARC,
Mimsey
What makes you think I have singled out only you? This is a recurrent default theme you seem to go to when you get too frustrated with facts that debunk your feelings. Anyone reading my posts for the past 9 years is well aware that I don't "target" anyone for destruction.
If a poster writes something which muddies up understanding the cult of Scientology (such as your "TribeTech[sup]tm[/sup]) that's something I try to correct so that newbies or KSW Koolaiders don't get even more confused than Scientology has already intentionally made them. I never bothered to comment on the vast majority of your posts, only the ones that were particularly misinformational.
It may help you to know that the only other time I commented about "TRIBES" is when the disgraced troll "Alanzo" began flooding the internet with a steady diet of Scientology talking points that weaponized the "tribe" word--in order to "dead agent" Scientology critics. I called out that useful idiocy as well.
There is no reason for you to try and play victim of my posts. We both post things that the other doesn't agree with----It's a conversation. When you go into that "HH IS ATTACKING ME!" mode, it's not a good look for you. That's what Scientologists have done since 1950 when anyone starts to debunk or expose their fraudulent hoax--the poor innocent religion that evil bigots are "attacking".
Nobody is attacking you, but some of your ideas are being robustly challenged. Hang in there if you really believe in what you are saying.
However, if you discover that you don't know what you are talking about, there's nothing wrong with admitting it. I do that all the time. Like when I left Scientology---I began to rehabilitate a wholetrack OT "power" called humility, LOL. I was unbelievably naive, gullible and stupid and it feels good to admit it. That's how people get past cult-think, right?
.
Last edited:
