To anyone who keeps using the Good users and bad users don't exist term, I highly suggest you to stop using this term permanently, why? Because, I will explain the reasons: 1. This term was created by Shaun Sullivan and his toxic fanbase, although I still hate Shaun Sullivan himself since he made CP and pedophilia and he's a dead topic. 2. Despite this blatant prevention of retribution, this term is popular amongst Fallout Fanatic 2007 The Vyonder’s haters, although I still hate Fallout Fanatic 2007 The Vyonder himself. 3. At first, you might think this term denies both sides, good and bad, but in reality, the main problem with this term is that it protects bad users from criticism and consequences. In fact, that’s most of what it does. Bad users are users whose actions aren’t deserved to be gone through by the users the bad users did the actions to, so by saying that bad users don’t exist, you’re essentially saying undeserved actions don’t exist, which is a LIE! 4. This term essentially means that since nobody is a bad user, nobody deserves to have anything bad happen to them no matter what they do. That is not true in the slightest! Why? Because if bad things don’t happen to bad users, they will be unpunished for what they did. Yes, you guessed it, Karma Houdinis. 5. Conversely, this is an excuse to give good users a false hatebase, as when they scold or make videos out of bad users, the good users are the ones who get a hatebase even though they are in the right since the bad users deserve it for what they did to the non-bad users. This is also protective of evilness and/or hypocritical, as the good user gets backlash for what they did when it was justified for being deserved, yet we see no one complaining when the bad user did something UNDESERVED to a NON-BAD USER! 6. When Randomly_GoAnimate reacts to being told this term by calling the offender a retribution hater by protecting the bad user from retribution, others will outright tell him that they are retribution haters too, just to tease him and make the offender look good. 7. This term is SUPER hypocritical. Besides what’s mentioned in the fifth reason, by using this term, you are basically admitting that you don’t exist if you’re either a good user who has redeeming qualities yet is imperfect for using this term, or a bad user who just wants to shield themselves from the retribution they deserve if they really exist. This term is also used even when the user hates the user they’re protecting, and this hypocrisy is excused as the fact that they believe they’re trying to prevent troll-feeding. 8 and final reason: This also counts as playing the hero card (that is, playing the victim card on a liked bad user’s behalf), as the hero card player is trying to look like a hero, when they’re helping the villain.
Also, wakeup call to @kahnenthedeafteenboy2k7 and other users who is still using the Good users and bad users don't exist term, I highly suggest you all to stop using this term permanently as mentioned in these 8 reasons.
AsaAshimaHanaka_X (朝芦間) (G4p TV)
To anyone who keeps using the Good users and bad users don't exist term, I highly suggest you to stop using this term permanently, why? Because, I will explain the reasons:
1. This term was created by Shaun Sullivan and his toxic fanbase, although I still hate Shaun Sullivan himself since he made CP and pedophilia and he's a dead topic.
2. Despite this blatant prevention of retribution, this term is popular amongst Fallout Fanatic 2007 The Vyonder’s haters, although I still hate Fallout Fanatic 2007 The Vyonder himself.
3. At first, you might think this term denies both sides, good and bad, but in reality, the main problem with this term is that it protects bad users from criticism and consequences. In fact, that’s most of what it does. Bad users are users whose actions aren’t deserved to be gone through by the users the bad users did the actions to, so by saying that bad users don’t exist, you’re essentially saying undeserved actions don’t exist, which is a LIE!
4. This term essentially means that since nobody is a bad user, nobody deserves to have anything bad happen to them no matter what they do. That is not true in the slightest! Why? Because if bad things don’t happen to bad users, they will be unpunished for what they did. Yes, you guessed it, Karma Houdinis.
5. Conversely, this is an excuse to give good users a false hatebase, as when they scold or make videos out of bad users, the good users are the ones who get a hatebase even though they are in the right since the bad users deserve it for what they did to the non-bad users. This is also protective of evilness and/or hypocritical, as the good user gets backlash for what they did when it was justified for being deserved, yet we see no one complaining when the bad user did something UNDESERVED to a NON-BAD USER!
6. When Randomly_GoAnimate reacts to being told this term by calling the offender a retribution hater by protecting the bad user from retribution, others will outright tell him that they are retribution haters too, just to tease him and make the offender look good.
7. This term is SUPER hypocritical. Besides what’s mentioned in the fifth reason, by using this term, you are basically admitting that you don’t exist if you’re either a good user who has redeeming qualities yet is imperfect for using this term, or a bad user who just wants to shield themselves from the retribution they deserve if they really exist. This term is also used even when the user hates the user they’re protecting, and this hypocrisy is excused as the fact that they believe they’re trying to prevent troll-feeding.
8 and final reason: This also counts as playing the hero card (that is, playing the victim card on a liked bad user’s behalf), as the hero card player is trying to look like a hero, when they’re helping the villain.
Also, wakeup call to @kahnenthedeafteenboy2k7 and other users who is still using the Good users and bad users don't exist term, I highly suggest you all to stop using this term permanently as mentioned in these 8 reasons.
1 week ago | [YT] | 4