• @starman2112
    link
    572 months ago

    I mean the guy didn’t even do anything to OP, we don’t even know if he was aware his girl was cheating with him

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      13
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      While we’re all playing morality police and talking about drugs, maybe keep in mind he stalked someguy being while he was obsessive and possessive of a woman.

      Playing vigilante and involving the police because you got hurt fweewings is a dogshit move.

      anyway everything on 4chan is fake, so this is just some incel fantasy about what he thinks would be cool.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -21
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It’s pretty heavily implied he knew. Why else would he be angrier at the dealer than his ex?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                162 months ago

                And it means nothing.

                You see that right? Just because you have an interpretation doesn’t make it correct.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    12 months ago

                    Sure, but we also have the consensus from this thread.

                    Which is more likely, you and however many upvotes you’ve had are correct, or the vastly more people here with the opposing view?

          • @starman2112
            link
            17
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            The fact that OP is a robot would imply that he is not mentally well and shouldn’t be trusted

              • @starman2112
                link
                92 months ago

                OP is a user of the 4chan board /r9k/, who go by the demonym “robot.” They are moderately less brain damaged than /b/tards, but only barely so

                • lad
                  link
                  fedilink
                  22 months ago

                  I thought you were referring to the lack of causality in the original statement 😅

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            6
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Correct, cuckolded men are well known to first ask their wife’s lover if they knew before attacking them. /s

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                72 months ago

                I’m not taking this personally, don’t project. I’m just amazed how you stubbornly argue against one of the oldest story tropes of all time: the horned, vengeful husband/wife.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -82 months ago

                  We’re discussing whether greentext believes the dealer knew it was his GF, I’m not sure how your comment relates to that.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    82 months ago

                    Amazing. I’m sorry if this was too complicated for you. Let me repeat:

                    There is no indication whatsoever that drug dealer guy knew. This has been explained to you a couple of times by other people.

                    In fact the glaring absence of any indication can be interpreted as: no, drug dealer did not know. This has also been explained.

                    You, on the other hand, claim the revenge taken out by Anon in itself is proof that he knew. Because a cuckold will never attack the lover unless the lover knew what they were doing.

                    That would be cool if it were so but it just isn’t. The trope of the cuckold attacking the lover is older than humanity itself. You’ll find stories even (or rather especially) in Greek mythology where cuckolding or just fancying the wrong person leads to eternal punishment. Also by the age of 20 most of us witnessed similar behavior a couple of times. If you didn’t good for you / grey out of the basement more.

                    You are doing the equivalent of arguing that 1+1 does not equal 2.