DeezorNuts

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@ItsyVitsyy @SharkyLeo_YT Yo dude you’re gonna die

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@yousmellb @KingofRogs @anonbirdd Count cuckula’s minions found crying in xitter comment sections

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Indyf7p @CaspianMidnight @N0rbertas @hi_guys_what_up Ofc not completely, they usually eventually get deleted but it lasts longer and gets more traction (then usually gets reposted dozens of times)

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Indyf7p @CaspianMidnight @N0rbertas @hi_guys_what_up No no, it does matter how you talk about it. Just bluntly saying it no flavor consistently results in it getting deleted, but doing shit like this (or one of those dumbass killerbean dance slideshows as an example) essentially bypasses the algorithm to an extent.

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Make_himfatter @lemondeer_ No he’s a deer

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 Why do you refer to yourself in the 2nd person and first person in the same sentence? Strange…

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 He’s lost for words because he got #owned

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 Then why’d you try to use your status as a linguist as an argument if you can’t prove it to be true??? Are you operating at full capacity or are you a CTE demon?

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@mryeast2000 Hello danger… burp

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@mryeast2000 Dude what the FUCK THAT’S NOT FUCKING NICE BRO UR GONNA DIE

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 We’re not talking about the validity of what the person said as grammatically correct, we’re talking about you using evidence that you can’t back up for an argument.

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 Can’t use it to support an argument if you can’t prove it

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 It’s kinda obvious you were taking it seriously from the start, sentences got shorter the more dumb you looked, then it devolved into subpar bait.

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 Devolved to baiting after being proven wrong, schrodinger’s theory confirmed!

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 For the sake of arguing evidence? Yes, yes you do lmao. If you don’t want to show people stuff, don’t use it as some form of “evidence” for an argument

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@mryeast2000 @Zackislost2 @TypicalRatBoi @RiAnimator @ashiesummer Yo bro ur gonna die bro

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@I_Despise_Red @Scorpion_Koi @KyleHydeFan @cheemsnugget @TemmieOrSmth99 @RockmanGuy10 Random true

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 @TypicalRatBoi @mryeast2000 @RiAnimator @ashiesummer For a linguist you’re pretty bad at playing semantics. Got proof that you are one so I can actually believe you or?

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 @TypicalRatBoi @mryeast2000 @RiAnimator @ashiesummer No, that’s a claim of credibility in an attempt to create proof. You must cite yourself as an actual linguist for it be proper proof, otherwise I could say “I have a masters in theology” in an argument about theology and be “right” if it weren’t for citation existing.

[DeezorNuts @NutsDeezornuts]

@Zackislost2 @TypicalRatBoi @mryeast2000 @RiAnimator @ashiesummer Yes, you have no proofs of being a linguist, therefore I have no reason to trust your opinion on a grammatical matter more than a normal person. If you “don’t care”, why are you saying you are in the first place?