>>649830
>i'm not going to boot it up to test something functionally irrelevant to satisfy your autism
You don't have to, this kind anon has done it for you
>>649815 , thank you very much. So as you can see, apparently there was at least one reason the foods buffs shouldn't work, and they do not work, as opposed to your baseless claim that apparently there's none
>if you think i'm contributing nothing to the discussion you could just ignore my post
Or I could use this opportunity to lecture a sheltered child on fundamentals of logical thinking to hopefully improve their perception of the world and their surroundings. The way you type makes you sound like a woman or a highly estrogenated pseudo male. Instead of trying to understand your faulty way of thinking that someone clearly points out to you, you naturally, instantly retreat and act like it's no big deal. Then you proceed to treat that someone as a bad person, or rather, not a "normal person" for daring to say something to you that you didn't like. In a situation like this, to me, that's only something a most spineless bitch would do. So instead, how about you man up, take it, and simply admit that you were in the wrong? Then you could also reflect upon it in the future, try to process the situation and learn from it, which would only help you to become a better person. Doesn't that sound better?
>like a normal person
And what's a "normal person" to you? What's "normal" and what isn't?