and just because EVERYONE misunderstood does not makei t correct.

Take the otterpill.

Carry on @Deleted User

WOW EVERYONE DIDNT UNDERSTAND AND CONTINUED TO SPEAK IGNORANTLY

Is otter a furry

IT MUST BE OKAY!

the question is interpreted perfectly as intended by others who have observed it.

eurofags like when someone is a scholar

but they don't care about proof

gay

no u

fuck

Who and why the fuck has a green role

Otter could very well be a furry.

It was not interpreted perfectly

Otter has transcended autism

High IQ

It was a discussion of the blind leading the blind.

@Doctor Anon

oof

I see no reason for you to go off on the idea that the question in it of itself may be incorrect or disorganized in a manner that you don't see fit.

It would appear Lazydaze gave him the role.

and just because the blind can lead the blind in circles does not make it okay.

Lazydaze is otterpilled. I think he was in the right to give him that role.

To better indulge his fantasy.

subjective/objective is an EPISTEMOLOGICAL debate

NOT AN ETHICAL ONE.

But ultimately criticizing the question provides no answer to the actual question.

Get it through your fucking head @εïз irma εïз

Wait is the high IQ not meant to be a sarcastic joke role

That's only avoiding and prolonging.

You can apply this to questions towards consciousness, religion, and so on.

A yellow bar over a post does not assign it any special significance Otter.

YOU CANNOT ANSWER A QUESTION BASED ON A FLAWED PREMISE

Of course you can't,

THERE'S NO SUBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE DISTINCTION IN ETHICS

that still dosen't mean you can't at least give some feasible answer.

?warn @Deleted User Rule 3

<:dynoSuccess:314691591484866560> ***ostentatiousotter#3068 has been warned.***

Useless mods are useless

HOW CAN I NOT BE IN A FIT OF RAGE WHEN EVERYONE IS DEFENDING TOTAL IGNORANCE