Originally posted by Mr Master
Yea TROLL, that was Wanda,
SAME person who tore it to bits and re-arranged it.Go read comics.
Which means you're a TROLL,
that's just trying to make a name for himself,
but instead continues to bury himself deeper in his blatant cluelessness."good guys won" ... 😆
"threat got dealt with" ... 😂Bonehead, that was Wanda,
SAME individual that broke the Omniverse and put it back the way it was..
I read the comics fine, thanks, and unlike you don't need to resort to infantile name calling. It's you who keep missing the point. The omniverse got put back the way it had been before it was damaged, so the good guys did win, and the threat to the rest of the omniverse was dealt with. So the writer saying that Wanda's reality warp affected the whole omniverse means nothing, because any damage it did outside of 616 was undone.
Originally posted by Mr Master So I guess she was the "bad guy and the good guy" ey TROLL?
She also "dealt with" her own actions.
Actually, yes, that is exactly the case. She was the "bad guy" because she altered her entire reality and caused a shockwave that struck the omniverse. But her friends figured out something was wrong and managed to reach her and convince her to undo it (hence "the good guys won"😉, at by trying to set things back, she was effectively the "good guy" again. And by trying to set right her mistakes, she "dealt with" her own actions.
Originally posted by Mr Master
But why would you know that,
when you're purpose as a secondary account is to TROLL, not debate,
how can you debate, you know nothing of comics.
Again, your paranoia convinces you I am a "secondary account". You insist I know nothing of comics, simply because I don't agree with your interpretation of things. You are actually hilarious with how wrong you are on so many things.
Originally posted by Mr Master "like you said?"All you've emitted out of that trap is what I dump in a toilet.
"threats that never amount to more than that?"
Dude, are completely retarded, or are you just giving it your best shot?
[B]If the "threat" didn't amoung to anything,
then how the heck was the Omniverse TORN to BITS and RE-ARRANGED?
The omniverse was also put all back together again almost exactly as it had been. So that tearing to bits and re-arranging amounted to nothing.
Originally posted by Mr Master🙄 Infantile, as ever.
That's not a "threat" my child,
it actually HAPPENED!!!Do you know what a "threat" is:
an intention/something likely/a possibility
What are you 14 going on 5?
Originally posted by Mr Master5funny .... Still falling deeper into a hole of stupidity I see.
How so? 🙂 You quoted Websters to back how you felt the words in the definition backed your interpretation; I quoted back Websters showing another definition for the same word, which doesn't back your definition. But as ever, you choose to only read the bits that suit you.
Originally posted by Mr MasterLOOK at this Clown yall,
taking 3rd and 2nd meanings to over ride the FIRST MEANINGS of a term.
Those other meanings are in there because the word has more than one meaning. Who are you to decide which meaning is the one the Handbook writers were using?
Originally posted by Mr Master
You need to go back to school.You can try, but you could never.
You're a joke in our forum,
others don't come in here and tell you this to avoid you TROLLING after them too.Nah, just yours TROLL, and the template TROLL that created you.
Btw. congratulations on your 20th lifetime Post at kmc TROLL.
All in this thread,
all meaningless,
all in a sad attempt to make your template account look good.Pathetic.
Bah, do what you do,
I'm done wiping the floor with your idiocy. You got a good bottom
and it was well deserved.Now go on, with your bad self,
post again some more toilet worth material
who cares,
nobody.yawn [/B]
Very childish. Amusingly so.
