Hello roninwoods, thanks for the comment.

Would you mind elaborating on which SJW tactics I am using?

When you say "most of my disagreements" are bullshit, what do you mean by that? That you don't agree with them?

I reply not to enrage the poster, but to stimulate debate about something that I believe is wrong. It may enrage you and all the other sensitive commenters who insist on resorting to ad-hominem attacks and downvoting to silence a voice of dissent.

But you are conflating when you say that I post to enrage. Causality, causality.

To address the final part of your comment, I challenge you or anyone who cares to, to go and read my posting history, and find a post where I say @lauralemons is lying.

If you invest the time, you will come to realize I never said - or implied - such thing.
Take it for what it is, but it is interesting this was her first assumption .. that I had accused her of lying.

While we may disagree on the following (I, for one, have no trouble with disagreement and different points of view ;)), it seems immoral, dubious and inauthentic that she is attempting to profit from her victimization.

It's clearly a conflict of interest - in my opinion.

And in much the same way she can decide to post on the internet for all to see about anything she wants, I too can post my opinions in response. Someone else in the thread said it right, this is not a blog with comments disabled, it's a two-way street.

Some people are not gonna like what some other people write, how could it ever be any other way?

You see, the difference is that I still want @stellabelle and @lauralemons to post their opinions, they want mine silenced.

At some point, you've gotta ask why.