Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 49 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,233,532
@previous (B) > kook nor brie will get naked
I highly doubt anyone here, or anywhere, would want to see that. That's also why it's clear as day that kook is an incel, explaining why she's always so angry.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,233,546
@1,233,532 (C)
Kook isn't an incel, she's married to a millionaire but chooses to live like a pauper. It's just a clerical error that the county registered a divorce with her name on it.
Anonymous F replied with this 2 years ago, 28 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,233,558
@1,233,551 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
If you're really married to someone with that much cash you'd be showing off some of the wealth. Why not take a pic that proves your affluent lifestyle.
I'm not doxing you so you can report me and get me banned, but nice try.
green replied with this 2 years ago, 22 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,233,580
@previous (kook)
Yeah, fuck men! Let's go to Tesco and clear out all of their Value Cider. Then we can pour it all over a few bibles and burn down my council flat!
Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 26 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,233,637
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I know you love to argue, but not everything is part of the internet slap fights that you so enjoy. I'm just calling it like I see it.
spectacles joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 14 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,234,061
i believe her that they haven't gotten a divorce, y'all are so limited in your scope you can't even handle a little bit of truth or any facts that dismantle your trolling. you had your fun and caused a little bit of confusion while they were gone, but now they're back and the game is over, you're not going to get get anything else out of them except half-hearted denials and "haha k." you'll get some limited play off of insisting you're right, but it's got a super limited lifespan. time to change your tack, let out a little sail, and catch the altered direction the wind is blowing.
you could be asking needling and pointed questions about the particulars of their arrangement, such as asking for clarity on the existence of a prenuptial agreement, for instance, or just speculating with cocksure certainty one way or the other and using that as a form of "divining rod" to predict certain answers or response behaviors, or, to negate them, depending on which speculative legal imbroglio you insist they are embroiled by or beholden to.
of course, this is just an example of how unsophisticated the trolling tactics are around here and not to be taken literally as an example of a means or method OF trolling in a specific sense, but as a general example of how one may pivot, or as they say in sports, "a juke", or possibly "to stiff arm" thus rendering the defenders position less than optimal, possibly even comical, but definitely on the back foot, so to speak. of course, it would take finesse to make a play based on the way the wind blows.