Freakin’ BOLD!
@Valerie_Valate
You too!
Now I feel sorry I’ve asked.
1 Like
I can confirm this as nearly being on the recieving end of her wrath once.
Even now i do not test Ms. Malitia.
3 Likes
I uh… wouldn’t recommend giving any reasons to inspire their wrath either.
Aha…
It’s not an experience easily forgotten…
2 Likes
As I wasn’t recording, my direct experience would be circumstantial to anyone else. All we’d really need is the security footage. Biometric scanning would confirm it, even with the disguise, as would a check of CONCORD’s fluid router logs.
Let me know when you start, then.
2 Likes
That’s a lot of words for “no.”
4 Likes
It would be, if that’s all it was. However, reality is hardly ever so free of nuance that ‘yes’ or ‘no’ is the entirety of the answer. As a result, sometimes brevity can be 100% honest and true, yet still misleading.
2 Likes
As a policy I don’t record unless consent is given.
It’d be terribly rude of me to take images of anyone and publicly defame them with such a thing.
Now if you don’t mind not witch hunting my dearest Diana with your nonsense and help me locate the real culprits, that would be nice.
You mean like consenting to set foot on private property? Sorry, Julian, I get the point you’re trying to make, but it’s hollow and doesn’t apply when they had to choose to be there in the first place.
1 Like
Surely that depends on what you plan to choose to do while you’re there…
I think Julia’s security policy is less concerned by attendance and more with love in all its forms, if you catch my drift
1 Like
The club where the party was held isn’t the entirety of the ship. It certainly didn’t encompass the docking area or the adjoining passages, all of which they’d need to pass through, and where any responsible ship’s security would be maintaining recordings in case of mishaps or sabotage.
1 Like
Are you referring to any security footage and biometric data that is currently not in possession?
The question was, do you have proof?
And the answer is quite simply, no.
But nice try obfuscating the answer.
3 Likes
How is it obfuscating to say that what proof I have is direct for me, but would be circumstantial and hearsay for you, and that there should be other proof that would be less circumstantial for you?
Note, as well, that simply being circumstantial and hearsay is not, in fact, the same as being inadmissible in most courts, despite courtroom dramas consistently falling back on that trope.
1 Like
And there it is.
I’m teasing you.
You’re so easy to get.
1 Like
Uhhhh… sure. You ‘got’ me to ask you a question. Good job, I guess?
1 Like
It was the passion behind that question you asked me.
1 Like
There was passion in it? Perhaps you should learn not to read into things.
1 Like
Only if! Passion Arrendis. Just like that last response.
Besides, who’s it hurting if I read passion into your responses? Like a dramatic reading?
Otherwise they are so dull and drab. Live a little, have some zest, well, I mean more so than tormenting Kim in her own logical fallacies.
1 Like
It creates misunderstanding, which is detrimental to clear communication. It’s unfortunate that you find accuracy to be ‘dull and drab’, though, and you have my sympathies for the unspeakable boredom, ennui, and futile sense of utter pointlessness that must pervade every aspect of your life if you’re reduced to trying to spice it up with dramatic readings of 14-word responses.
Personally, I tend to reserve my passion for those capable of inspiring it.
1 Like
That’s a lot of speculation on your part, and it’s obvious trolling to try an illicit some sort of negative response from me.
What you need is a hug. Common, bring it in!
1 Like
I similarly reserve my hugs.
1 Like