his thoroughly bad character and his sniveling and deceitful nature
This sounds like projection, but meh.
What the hell do you think Telia is being deceitful about? You don't think he's sincere in his beliefs?
I've never had an issue with either his or Imp's sincerity. As far as I can tell, they're 100% honest in their beliefs and just use selection bias to reinforce them.
The hilarious thing about this is that it will only reinforce Imp's obsession:
see? The stormfags aren't banned, only I get banned because it's the feminists who are running kia2 just like they're running the whole world.
Imp just wouldn't stay on topic.
That's why he should be banned. R16 is stupid, but Imp is fucking poison for the forum.
He should be permabanned for the same reason that someone who repeatedly goes to a Teriyaki restaurant and throws an outrageous fit that they don't serve spaghetti and harasses the staff and other customers would get thrown out. Sure, he might initially be an entertaining lolcow, but after the novelty has worn out you just want to eat your lunch in peace.
Also, my prediction of 3 days was overly conservative.
You're correct in that you're a nobody and you, apparently, don't care what Telia thinks -- except that you do care enough to continue to reply. So I guess you're not even correct about that.
You know, if you hadn't been so insane on every other topic, your warnings about the mRNA shots would have been much more effective. It's almost like you're intentionally poisoning the well for everything you say.
Telia keeps his obsessions to his own posts or at least on-topic posts, generally. Impossible1 spills it everywhere in every fucking thread.
Telia might get some help from other people because he's not completely anti-social. Impossible1 would not.
I don't think every verified account that mentions their Jewishness and/or support of Zionism are bots.
But a lot of them have to be. I can't imagine how those would be someone's defining features. I don't even understand why random nobodies fill out the "about me" section. Nobody gives a shit; all it does is alert everyone about your biases.
Imagine asking for a list of places as if it were concrete verification that you had visited those places. Any LLM will give you a plausible list of sightseeing spots and hotels for any major city from damn near any time period you ask it to.
Here's a quick run-down of the places I saw when I was in Paris back in 1900. I assure you I have perfect recollection from my trip 125 years ago. I visited the Exposition Universelle along the Seine to check out the Grand Palais and Petit Palais and the Ferris wheel. Had dinner at Maxim's. Checked out the Winged Victory of Samothrace at the Louvre and had lunch at the Tuileries Gardens.
Obviously had to check out the Moulin Rouge for the can-can girls.
Need me to continue? Now it's on you to prove that I wasn't there.
There's also the fact that Murphy probably would have done it out of respect of the original, not as a cynical cash-grab and subversive race swap. Obviously the financial motive is always going to be there but there's a big difference between "hey, this thing was awesome, I'd like to try to do it my way and make some money" vs "hey, this thing was popular, I'd bet we could make some money if we remade it and, while we're at it, fix the original's 'problems'."
Now it probably wouldn't have been good, because Murphy has had plenty of terrible movies in addition to the good ones, but it would have been far more likely to be mostly sincere.
Because you're a bad faith troll and I'm not interested in playing your DARVO game.