Waterloo at Home

The zestiest ROBLOX game ever that's full of femboys.
Playing it will turn you into a submissive femboy. Run while you can

" Hey, dude! Wanna play Waterloo at Home? "
" Hell nah, I don't wanna participate in a zestfest today dude! "

by elysium333333 May 10, 2024

Christian aitkens homeless bttm

Christian aitkens homeless bttm. A guy who got caught under a bridge bent over by a dirty old homeless man

Christian aitkens homeless bttm let's homeless man do him outside

by Wpg dude May 28, 2024

little piggy went home

when you’re snausaging and slip the pinky toe in the front hole

my guy was snausaging me and he tried to make sure the last little piggy went home

by spicynuggz June 2, 2024

Domo the homo

Big wewe
Sexy lips(dsls)
Braces
Hot
Shoe game on fleek

Domo the homo be swingin dat qyock

by dat guy man June 27, 2024

you vs homer

the hit roblox game you vs homer made in 2025 by deersxs on roblox

guy 1: wanna play a peak game
guy 2: whats it called
guy 1: you vs homer

by peakopeakoooopeak January 26, 2026

Argument Ad Structura-Actione-Hominem

A hybrid fallacy common in political debates online where the focus shifts simultaneously to the argument's structure, the arguer's actions, and the arguer's person—all while avoiding the actual content. The classic form: "You're proving the point of this post by your very response!" The move claims that the way someone argues (structure), what they do (action), or who they are (person) actually demonstrates the truth of the opposing position. It's a triple evasion—structure, action, and person all serve as distractions from content. The fallacy is particularly insidious because it feels clever—as if you've caught someone in a performative contradiction—but it still doesn't engage what they actually said.

"I critiqued a political post. Response: 'Your angry response just proves the post right!' That's Argument Ad Structura-Actione-Hominem—using my tone (action), my style (structure), and me (person) to dismiss my points without addressing them. Maybe I was angry; maybe my style was messy; maybe I'm flawed. None of that addresses whether my critique was valid. The move is clever evasion, not engagement."

by Abzugal February 28, 2026

Argumentum Ad Structura-Actione-Hominem

A hybrid fallacy common in political debates online where the focus shifts simultaneously to the argument's structure, the arguer's actions, and the arguer's person—all while avoiding the actual content. The classic form: "You're proving the point of this post by your very response!" The move claims that the way someone argues (structure), what they do (action), or who they are (person) actually demonstrates the truth of the opposing position. It's a triple evasion—structure, action, and person all serve as distractions from content. The fallacy is particularly insidious because it feels clever—as if you've caught someone in a performative contradiction—but it still doesn't engage what they actually said.

"I critiqued a political post. Response: 'Your angry response just proves the post right!' That's Argumentum Ad Structura-Actione-Hominem—using my tone (action), my style (structure), and me (person) to dismiss my points without addressing them. Maybe I was angry; maybe my style was messy; maybe I'm flawed. None of that addresses whether my critique was valid. The move is clever evasion, not engagement."

by Abzugal February 28, 2026