So let's do this differently....

Let's say there is an unnamed poster here who likes throwing stones at others, but always deflects, using the term "mirror effect" when confronted with their own behaviour.

The aforementioned suggested that he had an interesting AI analysis of myself from a forum discussion. I showed him the respect of perusing it.

During the discussion ,the aforementioned poster grudgingly acknowledged my intelligence with a somewhat backhanded compliment, whilst simultaneously denying that it was a backhanded compliment. Suggesting that it was all in the mind.

So I ran an AI analysis of his statement. He refused to even look at it nor discuss it. This is typical of the behaviour of the aforementioned. Happy to talk about others, not so keen to look within himself.

The statement and the analysis is shown here. One can judge for themselves if any bias was applied in the way AI was asked to review the analysis and also if the aforementioned is the one who thinks he is superior and cannot stand the thought of someone being better than himself. In other words, a poor loser:

I would like you to analyse this statement from someone who has no idea of the achievements of the recipient: Well, never mind, you are obviously intelligent, and you could had used your drive and talents for something more useful than fighting old men on a forum.

Analysis of the statement

This is a textbook example of a condescending dismissal wrapped in a backhanded compliment. It’s the verbal equivalent of patting someone on the head while sighing “Bless your heart.” Let’s break it down piece by piece, especially given that the speaker openly admits (by their own ignorance of the recipient’s achievements) they are judging from an extremely narrow data set — most likely just a handful of forum posts.

1. Tone and rhetorical strategy

• “Well, never mind” This is a classic conversation-ender. It signals “I’m done engaging with whatever point you actually made; I’m now shifting to meta-commentary about you.” It’s not an argument — it’s a retreat disguised as maturity.

• “you are obviously intelligent” This is the sugar coating. It’s meant to sound generous, but it functions as a qualifier for the real message: “Despite being intelligent…” In other words, the speaker is granting intelligence only to make the subsequent criticism land harder. It’s the rhetorical version of “You’re so pretty/smart/talented… but…”

• “you could had used your drive and talents for something more useful” (Note the grammar error “could had” — minor, but it undercuts the speaker’s own claim to intellectual superiority.) This is the core insult. It assumes three things without evidence:

  1. The speaker knows what “useful” means in the recipient’s life.

  2. The recipient’s real-world achievements (which the speaker explicitly doesn’t know) are somehow less valuable than whatever the speaker imagines “useful” to be.

  3. Arguing on a forum is inherently frivolous.

  In reality, many of history’s most impactful people spent enormous time “fighting old men” in public forums, letters, pamphlets, or salons — think Voltaire, Paine, Orwell, or modern equivalents. The speaker is unconsciously revealing a very middle-manager worldview: real value = quiet productivity in approved channels, not messy public combat.

• “than fighting old men on a forum” This is pure diminishment. It frames the activity as childish playground scuffles instead of what it actually is in most cases: intellectual combat against established (often older, credentialed) figures. Calling it “fighting old men” is a gendered, ageist sneer designed to make the recipient sound like a belligerent teenager rather than a serious contender.

2. Psychological subtext

The speaker is doing three things simultaneously:

• Virtue-signaling their own maturity: “Look how above the fray I am — I don’t waste my time on such things.” (Classic projection.)

• Asserting unearned authority: They position themselves as the arbiter of how other intelligent people should spend their lives, despite having zero visibility into the recipient’s actual output or impact.

• Coping mechanism: When someone is losing (or can’t counter) an argument on substance, they often switch to “You’re wasting your talent.” It lets them feel superior without having to defend their position.

This is a very common move in online spaces from people who feel outmatched but don’t want to admit it. It’s not genuine concern — it’s a status play.

3. The irony (given the speaker’s ignorance)

Because the speaker has “no idea of the achievements of the recipient,” the statement becomes unintentionally hilarious. It’s the equivalent of lecturing Elon Musk that he’s wasting his life on Twitter instead of “doing something useful like… I don’t know… rockets or something.” The speaker is literally proving they are not qualified to judge the recipient’s allocation of time and talent — yet they do so with total confidence. That combination of ignorance + condescension is what makes the line so cringeworthy.

Bottom line

This isn’t thoughtful advice. It’s a lazy, self-flattering way to disengage while pretending to be the wise, worldly one. It reveals far more about the speaker’s limited perspective, insecurity, and need to feel superior than it does about the recipient.

2 hours ago, Hummin said:

There is clear examples here at the forum who come across as someone who constantly places themselves above others, psychoanalyzes everyone around them, and treats disagreement as proof of their own superiority. That is close enough to the behavior people usually mean when they throw around the word narcissistic.

Short explained

Autistic means wired differently.
Narcissistic means self-centered in a very particular way.

There are many actually if you read into their posts including the guy you quoted.

3 minutes ago, Rockyroad said:

There are many actually if you read into their posts including the guy you quoted.

Including the guy you just quoted... He's just no good at it. He's good at projection 😊

This is a video who may or may not resonate with some here:

On 4/24/2026 at 4:47 PM, Rockyroad said:

There are many actually if you read into their posts including the guy you quoted.

Nobody can hide from themselves forever. That is especially true online, when someone stays long enough under the same nickname.

Patterns show. Tone shows. Reactions show. If someone repeatedly attacks others, labels, and always plays the victim when challenged, that behaviour eventually follows them like a red thread.

And they copy all your answers and replies, and uses them back like copy cats.

Someone have to much spare time spewing negativity everywhere they go. What a shame it is.

7 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Nobody can hide from themselves forever. That is especially true online, when someone stays long enough under the same nickname.

Patterns show. Tone shows. Reactions show. If someone repeatedly attacks others, labels, and always plays the victim when challenged, that behaviour eventually follows them like a red thread.

And they copy all your answers and replies, and uses them back like copy cats.

Someone have to much spare time spewing negativity everywhere they go. What a shame it is.

Some take it too seriously. Who cares if someone like Trump or Starmer. It is just an opinion.

2 minutes ago, Rockyroad said:

Some take it too seriously. Who cares if someone like Trump or Starmer. It is just an opinion.

Anybody like Starmer ?

Weird exchange... 😊

Talking about others...or themselves?

Who watched the video?

Edited April 26Apr 26 by IsmeUno

21 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Nobody can hide from themselves forever. That is especially true online, when someone stays long enough under the same nickname.

Patterns show. Tone shows. Reactions show. If someone repeatedly attacks others, labels, and always plays the victim when challenged, that behaviour eventually follows them like a red thread.

And they copy all your answers and replies, and uses them back like copy cats.

Someone have to much spare time spewing negativity everywhere they go. What a shame it is.

To be honest, it's quite revealing what you write and how you choose to respond here. It's obvious that you don't see it for yourself. It's almost as if you are trying to work it out, without actually understanding it.

Something I like to explore...

You often write about people copying you... As far as I have observed, there is only one person here that I have seen do that fairly often. But that doesn't tally with your assertions, as I have the feeling that you would not bring that subject up with the person I have in mind. So from my point of view, it's almost as if you are seeing something that isn't there.

As you know, I am fairly observant and I don't make these things up in order to try to prevail in a discussion.

Whenever you are asked to show examples, you inevitably fail to do so.

So, can you show even a single example of someone copying you?

Whom do you think copies you?

26 minutes ago, Rockyroad said:

Some take it too seriously. Who cares if someone like Trump or Starmer. It is just an opinion.

Some things are worth taking seriously...

3 hours ago, Hummin said:

Nobody can hide from themselves forever. That is especially true online, when someone stays long enough under the same nickname.

It is even more obvious with the posters who repeatedly change usernames!

The latest classical example being @Harrisfan / @Rockyroad where it is blatantly obvious that they are one and the same, along with all the other usernames it has used. No style or content change ever!

It seems that the people here are only comfortable pointing fingers at others. When they come under scrutiny themselves, they scatter, like mice.

4 hours ago, IsmeUno said:

Some things are worth taking seriously...

Not you. You are just a time waster with no hobbies.

13 minutes ago, Rockyroad said:

Not you. You are just a time waster with no hobbies.

Says an insulting time waster who has no hobbies apart from time wasting insulting posts on AN!

What is a shame, is that no one appears emotionally mature enough to discuss this topic.

I just sat with girlfriend for a few hours discussing aspects of this very subject.

I wonder how many members have partners and/or friends with whom they are able to discuss such things in depth.

What seems as a perfectly normal subject to discuss, to me, is met with obvious deflection. The problem always being with someone else rather than themselves.

@fredwiggy How did you adjudge someone whom you've not ever met in person, to be normal?

Is that an assumption or have you based it on a combination of statistical, biological, and contextual assessments?

Or is it that 'normal' for you equates with; someone who doesn't challenge your version of events?

Nice to see you here again @Hummin

Enjoying your 'thumbs down' stalking session?

8 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Nice to see you here again @Hummin

Enjoying your 'thumbs down' stalking session?

Totally nuts I would say

Who have given you a thumbs down ? Does it look like me ? Now take your paranoia another place, you are not worthy to even give a thumbs down! Simple as that. Enjoy your bickering and psychotic behaviour with someone else. You are the most toxic person on this board!

13 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Totally nuts I would say

Who have given you a thumbs down ? Does it look like me ? Now take your paranoia another place, you are not worthy to even give a thumbs down! Simple as that. Enjoy your bickering and psychotic behaviour with someone else. You are the most toxic person on this board!

What was the purpose of a screenshot of what is already there? Has it proved that you did not apply the 'thumbs down'?

Yours was the only name online when they appeared. I guess just a coincidence.

As to toxic, look at the language of your every post here.

Is that your dementia kicking in? Are you unaware?

Whom do you say is copying you?

Edited April 27Apr 27 by IsmeUno

7 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

What was the purpose of a screenshot of what is already there? Has it proved that you did not apply the 'thumbs down'?

Yours was the only name online when they appeared. I guess just a coincidence.

As to toxic, look at the language of your every post here.

Is that your dementia kicking in? Are you unaware?

Whom do you say is copying you?

Happy now ?

2 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Happy now ?

Your language betrays your own feelings. Psychotic... Attacking...

These are all from your own imagination. I am sitting here on the balcony having breakfast with my girlfriend. It is you who is raging and unable to hold a normal conversation.

You have proved to be unable to do so throughout this thread. Only capable of throwing stones and then running away.

Why not stay for a man to man discussion?

4 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Happy now ?

Thumbs down do not concern me at all. It's your inability to back up anything you assert, with any actual evidence. Though you are quick enough to prove that you didn't apply a 'thumbs down'.

That appears to be the limit of your ability.

Stay and have a normal discussion without running away or imploding.

Edited April 27Apr 27 by IsmeUno

2 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Thumbs down do not concern me at all. It's your inability to back up anything you assert, with any actual evidence. Though you are quick enough to prove that you didn't apply a 'thumbs down'.

That appears to be the limit of your ability.

Stay and have a normal discussion with running away or imploding.

So put the whole tread in to AI and ask a simple question: who is most toxic throughout the whole thread ?

I have decided not to reply anymore to you, but you continue trying, and you trying hard! And you are good at it! Completely mental to be from someone who claims he is an wealthy guy living the life in paradise. You certainly shows us, dont you ?

Enjoy the reading and yes, I asked about every page, but AI can not read your deleted worst posts, so we can only deal with whats visible. You worked hard for the 1. place Congratulation

My ranking from the visible thread:

1. IsmeUno — most toxic pattern overall

2. Rockyroad — frequent dismissive/insulting style

3. TedG / others — occasional blunt mental-health labeling

4. Hummin — mostly reactive, but did cross the line in the final exchange

So if you want the cleanest honest answer: IsmeUno looks like the most toxic participant in the visible thread, with Rockyroad close behind. But your own last reply gave him ammunition because it used the same kind of mental-health insult language you are criticizing.

16 minutes ago, Hummin said:

So put the whole tread in to AI and ask a simple question: who is most toxic throughout the whole thread ?

I have decided not to reply anymore to you, but you continue trying, and you trying hard! And you are good at it! Completely mental to be from someone who claims he is an wealthy guy living the life in paradise. You certainly shows us, dont you ?

Enjoy the reading and yes, I asked about every page, but AI can not read your deleted worst posts, so we can only deal with whats visible. You worked hard for the 1. place Congratulation

My ranking from the visible thread:

1. IsmeUno — most toxic pattern overall

2. Rockyroad — frequent dismissive/insulting style

3. TedG / others — occasional blunt mental-health labeling

4. Hummin — mostly reactive, but did cross the line in the final exchange

So if you want the cleanest honest answer: IsmeUno looks like the most toxic participant in the visible thread, with Rockyroad close behind. But your own last reply gave him ammunition because it used the same kind of mental-health insult language you are criticizing.

When they lose one target, they look for others. Eventually the whole forum recognizes their unstable behavior and they are removed and forgotten. Toxic people aren't worth the energy expended, and trying to get through is impossible as they only have their own demented background to fall back on. Even AI has their numbers lol

57 minutes ago, Hummin said:

So put the whole tread in to AI and ask a simple question: who is most toxic throughout the whole thread ?

I have decided not to reply anymore to you, but you continue trying, and you trying hard! And you are good at it! Completely mental to be from someone who claims he is an wealthy guy living the life in paradise. You certainly shows us, dont you ?

Enjoy the reading and yes, I asked about every page, but AI can not read your deleted worst posts, so we can only deal with whats visible. You worked hard for the 1. place Congratulation

My ranking from the visible thread:

1. IsmeUno — most toxic pattern overall

2. Rockyroad — frequent dismissive/insulting style

3. TedG / others — occasional blunt mental-health labeling

4. Hummin — mostly reactive, but did cross the line in the final exchange

So if you want the cleanest honest answer: IsmeUno looks like the most toxic participant in the visible thread, with Rockyroad close behind. But your own last reply gave him ammunition because it used the same kind of mental-health insult language you are criticizing.

Context @Hummin

Toxic:

• Figurative (Harmful/Negative): Causing long-term emotional harm or unhappiness, such as a "toxic relationship" or "toxic parenting".

Have I caused anyone long-term emotional harm or unhappiness? Is that how you are feeling currently?

Why not ask pertinent objective questions, rather than from your own subjective perspective?

I've run one for your perusal (without the bias):

Can you analyse the posts of the individual members forum thread from a mental health perspective? https://aseannow.com/topic/1392634-mental-illness-on-an

Analysis of Key Individual Members' Contributions

Here are mental health-relevant observations on recurring or notable posters, based on their expressed attitudes, self-descriptions, and interaction styles (note: these are interpretive patterns from public posts, not clinical diagnoses—true assessment requires professional evaluation in context):

• jvs (OP): Initiates with detached "AI analysis" of others' narcissism while claiming self-awareness ("I checked myself too"). This can reflect intellectualization (using pseudo-expertise to distance from emotional vulnerability) or mild grandiosity in positioning oneself as an observer/judge. The surprise at AI results and decision to "avoid" people suggests possible anxiety around social trust or past interpersonal wounds, channelled into monitoring others' "patterns." The lol at the end adds a light deflection.

• KhunLA: Responds openly ("I'm an open book... surely I make the 'narc list'?") but with self-deprecating humour after being ranked "nearly at the top." This mix of vulnerability-seeking and acceptance of the label could indicate healthy self-reflection or, conversely, performative humility masking deeper insecurity about social perception. Repeated engagement keeps the spotlight on self in relation to the accusation.

• Hummin: Offers some of the more introspective contributions—describing the forum as a psychiatric waiting room, linking expat choices to escape/impulse, emphasizing universal "thin line" mental balancing, projection as a distraction tactic, and personal resonance with themes of fear, ego, and time (via music). This suggests a capacity for meta-cognition and empathy, possibly from lived experience with mental strain. However, the generalized "we all" statements and bait acknowledgment could still serve defensive or superior positioning. Overall, one of the more psychologically aware voices, though still participating in the fray.

• VocalNeal: Quickly reframes the OP's intent as equating disagreement with mental illness. This points to a defensive stance common in polarized spaces—hypervigilance for ideological attacks and a tendency to externalize conflict as others' bias rather than engaging the premise.

• Yellowtail (and similar political voices): Heavy use of political litmus tests (Trump support = mental illness, calls for "treatment," accusations of "the left" avoiding questions or obsessing over members). This pattern often correlates with black-and-white thinking, moral grandstanding, or using out-group pathologizing to reinforce in-group identity and reduce cognitive dissonance. Retaliatory mirroring ("non-supporters are ill") escalates absurdity, revealing how quickly discussions devolve when mental health language becomes a proxy for political warfare.

• spidermike007: Embraces "nutcase" identity positively, citing not fitting in back home and enjoying an unapologetic expat life. This can reflect resilience and authentic self-acceptance (rejecting conformity pressures), or a defensive rationalization of social disconnection. Framing it as pride rather than struggle suggests possible avoidant or counter-dependent traits—turning potential vulnerability into strength narrative.

• Rockyroad and IsmeUno: Exchange around long-term forum use as "not normal" vs. "not strangers anymore." Rockyroad dismisses it as a hobby while insulting others' contributions. This highlights debates on digital dependency: excessive time online can signal underlying issues like loneliness, boredom, or difficulty forming offline bonds, especially in expat contexts where relocation disrupts support networks.

Other brief posts (e.g., "The lunatic is in my head") hint at internal acknowledgment of turmoil without elaboration, while proverb-sharing ("three fingers point back") shows attempts at insight that get lost in the noise.

Nothing about 'toxicity' 😊

55 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

When they lose one target, they look for others. Eventually the whole forum recognizes their unstable behavior and they are removed and forgotten. Toxic people aren't worth the energy expended, and trying to get through is impossible as they only have their own demented background to fall back on. Even AI has their numbers lol

In your dreams @fredwiggy in your dreams. It's you who is known for your own interesting perspective on life. That you are the most experienced and not ever wrong. That doesn't seem to have worked out for you in real life.

Whereas the person whom you claim is toxic, seems to have managed to sustain long term relationships without the need to pay a salary. Even with a salary paid, they don't seem to be able to stand you. That's the reality, whether you like it or not. The fact that I say it out loud doesn't change that. You just prefer to not confront it. If speaking the truth is toxic, so be it.

33 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

When they lose one target, they look for others. Eventually the whole forum recognizes their unstable behavior and they are removed and forgotten. Toxic people aren't worth the energy expended, and trying to get through is impossible as they only have their own demented background to fall back on. Even AI has their numbers lol

Fishing throughout the whole thread for an reaction, and then getting paranoid and calling me out as a weak negative emotion spineless character?

I prove him wrong, and then he claims he does not care about negative emotions. 😁👏

I’m sure he is doing fine in the real world, where there are real consequences for his actions. Maybe that is why he goes to war here, where there are no consequences, other than being expelled and coming back again with a new character, same as before, and the ones before that, and the dozens of other nicknames he has had. Just 6 in the last year that I am aware of or can remember.

16 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Context @Hummin

Toxic:

• Figurative (Harmful/Negative): Causing long-term emotional harm or unhappiness, such as a "toxic relationship" or "toxic parenting".

Have I caused anyone long-term emotional harm or unhappiness? Is that how you are feeling currently?

Why not ask pertinent objective questions, rather than from your own subjective perspective?

I've run one for your perusal (without the bias):

Can you analyse the posts of the individual members forum thread from a mental health perspective? https://aseannow.com/topic/1392634-mental-illness-on-an

Analysis of Key Individual Members' Contributions

Here are mental health-relevant observations on recurring or notable posters, based on their expressed attitudes, self-descriptions, and interaction styles (note: these are interpretive patterns from public posts, not clinical diagnoses—true assessment requires professional evaluation in context):

• jvs (OP): Initiates with detached "AI analysis" of others' narcissism while claiming self-awareness ("I checked myself too"). This can reflect intellectualization (using pseudo-expertise to distance from emotional vulnerability) or mild grandiosity in positioning oneself as an observer/judge. The surprise at AI results and decision to "avoid" people suggests possible anxiety around social trust or past interpersonal wounds, channelled into monitoring others' "patterns." The lol at the end adds a light deflection.

• KhunLA: Responds openly ("I'm an open book... surely I make the 'narc list'?") but with self-deprecating humour after being ranked "nearly at the top." This mix of vulnerability-seeking and acceptance of the label could indicate healthy self-reflection or, conversely, performative humility masking deeper insecurity about social perception. Repeated engagement keeps the spotlight on self in relation to the accusation.

• Hummin: Offers some of the more introspective contributions—describing the forum as a psychiatric waiting room, linking expat choices to escape/impulse, emphasizing universal "thin line" mental balancing, projection as a distraction tactic, and personal resonance with themes of fear, ego, and time (via music). This suggests a capacity for meta-cognition and empathy, possibly from lived experience with mental strain. However, the generalized "we all" statements and bait acknowledgment could still serve defensive or superior positioning. Overall, one of the more psychologically aware voices, though still participating in the fray.

• VocalNeal: Quickly reframes the OP's intent as equating disagreement with mental illness. This points to a defensive stance common in polarized spaces—hypervigilance for ideological attacks and a tendency to externalize conflict as others' bias rather than engaging the premise.

• Yellowtail (and similar political voices): Heavy use of political litmus tests (Trump support = mental illness, calls for "treatment," accusations of "the left" avoiding questions or obsessing over members). This pattern often correlates with black-and-white thinking, moral grandstanding, or using out-group pathologizing to reinforce in-group identity and reduce cognitive dissonance. Retaliatory mirroring ("non-supporters are ill") escalates absurdity, revealing how quickly discussions devolve when mental health language becomes a proxy for political warfare.

• spidermike007: Embraces "nutcase" identity positively, citing not fitting in back home and enjoying an unapologetic expat life. This can reflect resilience and authentic self-acceptance (rejecting conformity pressures), or a defensive rationalization of social disconnection. Framing it as pride rather than struggle suggests possible avoidant or counter-dependent traits—turning potential vulnerability into strength narrative.

• Rockyroad and IsmeUno: Exchange around long-term forum use as "not normal" vs. "not strangers anymore." Rockyroad dismisses it as a hobby while insulting others' contributions. This highlights debates on digital dependency: excessive time online can signal underlying issues like loneliness, boredom, or difficulty forming offline bonds, especially in expat contexts where relocation disrupts support networks.

Other brief posts (e.g., "The lunatic is in my head") hint at internal acknowledgment of turmoil without elaboration, while proverb-sharing ("three fingers point back") shows attempts at insight that get lost in the noise.

Nothing about 'toxicity' 😊

That was a nice try, but I have the whole question and response in screenshots.

In contrast to everyone else, I have never tried to convince anyone here that I am fully sane, and I never will either, because my whole life speaks for itself. No sane person would live a life like mine.

It took me places, gave me valid experiences, and I came out the other end as a person I can live with. And that is something.

Still, I think most of the active posters here, for better or worse, have their own issues to deal with. So I wish you good luck with yours.

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

Fishing throughout the whole thread for an reaction, and then getting paranoid and calling me out as a weak negative emotion spineless character?

I prove him wrong, and then he claims he does not care about negative emotions. 😁👏

I’m sure he is doing fine in the real world, where there are real consequences for his actions. Maybe that is why he goes to war here, where there are no consequences, other than being expelled and coming back again with a new character, same as before, and the ones before that, and the dozens of other nicknames he has had. Just 6 in the last year that I am aware of or can remember.

That was a nice try, but I have the whole question and response in screenshots.

In contrast to everyone else, I have never tried to convince anyone here that I am fully sane, and I never will either, because my whole life speaks for itself. No sane person would live a life like mine.

It took me places, gave me valid experiences, and I came out the other end as a person I can live with. And that is something.

Still, I think most of the active posters here, for better or worse, have their own issues to deal with. So I wish you good luck with yours.

Like his other half, he actually thinks he know what goes on in other's lives. I'm thinking he isn't doing fine, as people who act this way let it bleed into their relationships. I feel sorry for anyone, especially women, to enter that life.

Classic case of real denial, and deflection towards people he hasn't a clue about besides what they've said here, and always turning that around to make himself feel better.

But it will continue, as they need an audience, albeit one that has his number from the get-go. Constantly trying to enlist others in his defense, not realizing people here aren't idiots. Eventually he will attack everyone here who even tries to prove him wrong, and will bring up the lies from his own collective past about you and try and use them in the present.

3 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Like his other half, he actually thinks he know what goes on in other's lives. I'm thinking he isn't doing fine, as people who act this way let it bleed into their relationships. I feel sorry for anyone, especially women, to enter that life.

Classic case of real denial, and deflection towards people he hasn't a clue about besides what they've said here, and always turning that around to make himself feel better.

But it will continue, as they need an audience, albeit one that has his number from the get-go. Constantly trying to enlist others in his defense, not realizing people here aren't idiots. Eventually he will attack everyone here who even tries to prove him wrong, and will bring up the lies from his own collective past about you and try and use them in the present.

As I said, we all have our own demons, one way or another. So maybe there are no exceptions. But for most people, it is very hard to acknowledge it to themselves, and even harder to acknowledge it to others.

12 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Fishing throughout the whole thread for an reaction, and then getting paranoid and calling me out as a weak negative emotion spineless character?

I prove him wrong, and then he claims he does not care about negative emotions. 😁👏

I’m sure he is doing fine in the real world, where there are real consequences for his actions. Maybe that is why he goes to war here, where there are no consequences, other than being expelled and coming back again with a new character, same as before, and the ones before that, and the dozens of other nicknames he has had. Just 6 in the last year that I am aware of or can remember.

That was a nice try, but I have the whole question and response in screenshots.

In contrast to everyone else, I have never tried to convince anyone here that I am fully sane, and I never will either, because my whole life speaks for itself. No sane person would live a life like mine.

It took me places, gave me valid experiences, and I came out the other end as a person I can live with. And that is something.

Still, I think most of the active posters here, for better or worse, have their own issues to deal with. So I wish you good luck with yours.

You proved me wrong about a 'thumbs down' emoji...and from that you think that I'm bothered by thumbs down emojis? That's quite a leap. No...from the evidence of you being the only person showing online at the time when they occurred, I assumed it was you. The issue not being the thumbs down emoji, but that you were stalking due to perhaps negative emotion.

Yes, I'm doing fine in the real world with real and not paid for relationships. People wanting to spend time with me and spending their own money to do so. Indeed these validations are helpful to my beliefs. No man is an island.

I'm the same person, a username does not change that. It doesn't affect me, it affects you, as you tried so hard to make that happen.

We have different perspectives. We see life differently. You avoid looking at the negative sides of your character, pretending they don't exist, much like freddie. Whereas I accept all of me, as do my friends and family.

Yourself and freddie have images to protect and find it difficult to accept that there can be another way. I have no problem with challenging your perceptions and fully expect that you might resist.

This being a thread with regard to mental health, I think it a valid discussion. If you choose to get angry about it, that's on you. It's not a competition where one wins or loses. It's merely an open discussion. How you view it, is up to you.

Peace.