Snark deficiency needs correcting.

[lilairen]

Paraphrased from email:

Just because a statement like "poly people are more advanced" doesn't apply to you doesn't mean it's not true!

I actually had to respond to this as if it were sane. I had to block the snark from manifesting. Please help me correct this systemic imbalance.

Comments

[saoba]

See, I'd have been tempted to reply with "Just because a statement like 'poly people are more advanced' is true doesn't mean it applies to you either."

Or, "Nothing says 'more advanced' like dismissing people who disagree with you. I see your point."

Mostly I just look at people like that and nod amiably while I edge away. Do not stick your hand in the crazy, that's my policy.

[arabwel]

...

Anyone got an industrial grade bandaid? MY fporehead just effing collapsed.

[polyfrog]

"Similarly, just because every single thing you say isn't complete idiocy doesn't mean any particular statement (such as the one currently under discussion) isn't as coherent as a baboon on crack pounding on a Dvorak typewriter with his eyes closed."

[tgeller]

"Shut up, that's why!"

/My answer for everything
//What's with all the slashies in my snarks lately?
///Gotta stop reading fark.com.

[elynne]

I don't have any particularly on-topic snarking to make, I just wanted to say that seeing that user picture caused me a moment of severe cognitave dissonance, which is kind of cool. "Wait - I didn't post anything to dot_poly_snark! Did I? I'm virtually certain I didn't... but that's my userpic! Oh, wait, that's not my LJ handle..."

[red_girl_42]

Heehee. I just did that with eddyfate's comment above.

Oh the small world of LJ icons.