Polymarketcant open top holders, activity, etc
cant open top holders, activity, etc
Begotten参与话题 14消息总数 1585
该用户的聊天记录定位。
聊天记录
共 1585 条，显示第 1401-1450 条if not, ask yourself what the intention behind those words were
if not, ask yourself what the intention behind those words were
it's extremely clear
it's extremely clear
context makes it negative and mocking
context makes it negative and mocking
I bought at 30c letsgo
I bought at 30c letsgo
hop on the june 7 train
hop on the june 7 train
everything else is secondary, identifying intention, object, etc
everything else is secondary, identifying intention, object, etc
the "written or verbal" clause specifically applies to whatever constitutes an insult
the "written or verbal" clause specifically applies to whatever constitutes an insult
insult itself isn't written, only names
insult itself isn't written, only names
here there is no written insult, therefore it cannot qualify
here there is no written insult, therefore it cannot qualify
the primary factor is a written insult, and an image might be accompanied in order to identify the intent
the primary factor is a written insult, and an image might be accompanied in order to identify the intent
no, this would not count according to the rules. it
no, this would not count according to the rules. it
image depicts a text. it's written on an image rather than truth social overlay
image depicts a text. it's written on an image rather than truth social overlay
there is no functional difference here. it's the exact same scenario
there is no functional difference here. it's the exact same scenario
imagine that there is a tucker carlson's photo posted, and he replies "what a loser" - do you think that qualifies?
imagine that there is a tucker carlson's photo posted, and he replies "what a loser" - do you think that qualifies?
is there a clause which draws the line between direct and indirect verbal insults?
is there a clause which draws the line between direct and indirect verbal insults?
who do you think "we" refers to?
who do you think "we" refers to?
get on the Israel announces Lebanon ceasefire extension train guys
get on the Israel announces Lebanon ceasefire extension train guys
its a recorded public statement against the individual depicted
its a recorded public statement against the individual depicted
"we're going losing" and photo of an individual
"we're going losing" and photo of an individual
where did that come from? obviously it applies to the people depicted
where did that come from? obviously it applies to the people depicted
zelensky putin
zelensky putin
image with a written insult
image with a written insult
yes? the manner is clearly negative in context most of the time
yes? the manner is clearly negative in context most of the time
?
?
its a clear yes
its a clear yes
its aclear yes
its aclear yes
plaintiff alone would qualify
plaintiff alone would qualify
great debtor is speaking
great debtor is speaking
@bosurm
@bosurm
The problem is that you're gullible enough to believe it's actually helping Y
The problem is that you're gullible enough to believe it's actually helping Y
@bosurm
@bosurm
Only considered when there is a clause allowing it to be considered
Only considered when there is a clause allowing it to be considered
Counterargument: "arguments don't hold up"
Counterargument: "arguments don't hold up"
Alan have you ever done an IQ test?
Alan have you ever done an IQ test?
Yes, go ahead and full port
Yes, go ahead and full port
Lmao
Lmao
Just like it's displayed Jan 1 currently
Just like it's displayed Jan 1 currently
No. May was June 1, and it was displayed July 1 yesterday because that's June 30 market deadline. There was not an error
No. May was June 1, and it was displayed July 1 yesterday because that's June 30 market deadline. There was not an error
"Also, fuck the rules"
"Also, fuck the rules"
fucking hell
fucking hell
lets go Y side big ball nggas win
lets go Y side big ball nggas win
holy shit lol
holy shit lol
27c
27c
there *can be* 2 different deadlines, and the one you're referring to doesn't currently exist
there *can be* 2 different deadlines, and the one you're referring to doesn't currently exist
although there should be a clause for reporting deadline, it currently doesn't exist, so 3-5 days after a 26-day market seems reasonable
although there should be a clause for reporting deadline, it currently doesn't exist, so 3-5 days after a 26-day market seems reasonable
and what's the issue with waiting for confirmation?
and what's the issue with waiting for confirmation?
it seems that the N side is aware it happened, and they're rushing to close the market
it seems that the N side is aware it happened, and they're rushing to close the market
done deal guys
done deal guys
trump obviously insulted them, as indirect as it may seem
trump obviously insulted them, as indirect as it may seem