Happy Pride

Made me happy.

Exposed that chess.com has a bigot issue.

Exposed said bigots to a counter argument.

Provided resources/videos for the curious or interested.

Showed lgbtq+ people they're not alone here.

I know you don't mean it in a bad way, but when someone is saying "I'm not ashamed of existing" in public is a bit rude to tell them "you shouldn't do that because people don't like it. There must be a better way."

In any case, I disagree that this is a bad way to do it. The more the topic is brought up in a rational and positive manner, the more people will accept it.

Always end up like what? Nothing was happening in the topic when you said that, I don't understand.

Nah. Better moderation on many, lol 😆

Mate listen here. If you would read the damn thread then maybe you’d understand. He’s Sauk g that to me. At the time I was upset (still am) about a ridiculous and unnecessary comment comparing the Holocaust to a controversial and much less upsetting and disturbing topic. And still hasn’t apologized. He saw that I was upset and that there was no way DL would apologize or such so he told me to just give up as there is no point as ignorant people will always be ignore. Sometimes. 

Not here to cause problems yet when someone says something about a topic close to me and basically makes it worse is just repulsive and pathetic

The topic isn't an argument. It's to just say "I exist and I'm not ashamed of it" and when that happens enough, eventually there's no more reason to say it, because people stop caring. It becomes "oh yeah, some humans are LGBT, whatever, I don't care."

That's how I see topics like this and pride month in general.

Eh ok.

If I wanted to argue with DL I wouldn't demand an apology. I'd acknowledge the point and/or POV they were trying to make, and then using that as a context, explain why I disagree.

I didn't read your post, but for example I might say something like "while bigotry and hate exist in both circumstances, it's in bad taste and lazy to compare some of the worst atrocities in history to those who disagree with your position" and then DL might say "I'm not calling my opponents nazis, I'm highlighting how all humans have the capacity for irrational hate, and that when unchecked it can lead to very bad things"

blah blah blah

That's how a rational conversation might go. Not typing in all caps (which I noticed you doing) and demanding apologies (lol).

A counter argument you started? If you didn’t say a racist and unbelievably hateful statement about the Holocaust, there would be no counter argument. I should get some popcorn.

Do you have family that was gassed at Belzec? If you don’t, then you have no right to say how I feel is irrational.

Nah, there's nuance to the difference between, for example, arguments and discussions. Arguments imply emotions and rhetoric. I could type a lot of blah blah blah trying to explain it, but you're like, 12 years old, so there's no point (now I'm arguing )

"I'm not responsible for the quality of my arguments because my emotions overwhelm me"

Is the definition of irrational.

Try arguing with ignorant people. When you come back, crawling on the floor bawling your eyes out, then tell me how ridiculous I am. And also, to state again what I said: Do you have family that was gassed at Belzec Death Camp? I think not… so please don’t try to say how I need to be more rational. Damn, no wonder I was inactive for months. People like this just make me want to leave Chess. Com. But I won’t because I will never succumb to ignorant people.

And I didn't say you don't have a good reason for how you feel... I said your resulting argumentation was poor.