So here’s something I want to observe about this defense, and others like it you’ve done. You take offense at a statement like “klob does [negative thing]”, and you call it a lie, but when it comes to addressing the specific events that [negative thing] is being used to describe, you don’t actually refute the events.
Instead you hold up a list of [positive trait]s and go “how can I [negative thing] when I so clearly have [positive trait]??” as if it’s impossible to do two things at once.
Take the lovebombing claim. This is at least partially traced to the event, recorded in chat, of you trying to give a present to Duncan’s daughter. Did you offer gifts at a time following negative interaction? Then you lovebombed.
Take the stalking claim. This is at least partially traced to informing Duncan that you had found his physical address and performed a background check, and at least partially to your own posted GPS screenshot of searching for a friend’s address. Did you track and record the location of the home of people who did not explicitly give that information to you? Then you were stalking them.
Everything else in this document is a distraction, presenting a heap of [positive trait]s attempting to drown out the existence of the [negative thing]s you have done. If you do not address those specific [negative thing]s and perhaps explain how they are not accurately described as “lovebombing” or “stalking” or whatnot, then this is just so much static.
Do not bother responding unless you do so with an explanation of how those specific events are not accurately described.
So here’s something I want to observe about this defense, and others like it you’ve done. You take offense at a statement like “klob does [negative thing]”, and you call it a lie, but when it comes to addressing the specific events that [negative thing] is being used to describe, you don’t actually refute the events.
Instead you hold up a list of [positive trait]s and go “how can I [negative thing] when I so clearly have [positive trait]??” as if it’s impossible to do two things at once.
Take the lovebombing claim. This is at least partially traced to the event, recorded in chat, of you trying to give a present to Duncan’s daughter. Did you offer gifts at a time following negative interaction? Then you lovebombed.
Take the stalking claim. This is at least partially traced to informing Duncan that you had found his physical address and performed a background check, and at least partially to your own posted GPS screenshot of searching for a friend’s address. Did you track and record the location of the home of people who did not explicitly give that information to you? Then you were stalking them.
Everything else in this document is a distraction, presenting a heap of [positive trait]s attempting to drown out the existence of the [negative thing]s you have done. If you do not address those specific [negative thing]s and perhaps explain how they are not accurately described as “lovebombing” or “stalking” or whatnot, then this is just so much static.
Do not bother responding unless you do so with an explanation of how those specific events are not accurately described.