[caminante]

?

Did you mean to reply to someone else? I don't know where this is coming from as I didn't make these claims.

That said, your comment is disturbing.

It's a obnoxious to "strongly dislike" (read: hate) people who don't have resilient self-esteem. It lacks compassion. And if someone's bullying you, getting platitudes about "responsible for your feelings" and "boundaries" is useless.

[conductr]

Strongly dislike can also mean you just prefer to avoid those people or limit your interactions. It doesn’t mean hate.

If you want people like this to stop avoiding you, it’s an internal adjustment that needs to be made. That’s the responsibility for yourself part. Ignoring you is not hurting the other person one bit, actually they are benefiting from it as they skip dealing with your personality they dislike. It’s not to say they are biased against you, if you were more compatible they may change their stance without thinking about it. That wouldn’t happen if they hated you.

[caminante]

> Strongly dislike can also mean you just prefer to avoid those people or limit your interactions. It doesn’t mean hate.

Come on...the first Google result for hate [0] is "feel intense or passionate dislike for (someone)". Saying otherwise is too much.

[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=hate+definition

[conductr]

Hate is a strong dislike but that doesn’t mean a strong dislike is hate.

It could mean anything more. Especially given the medium we’re using to communicate, where they chose those words instead of just saying hate. This medium is concise and those words were chosen over the word hate. I think it’s most likely they were chosen to reference to the huge grey area of stuff they could have meant but they didn’t want to explain due to their desire for to keep concise text communications which is what we’re all engaging with online. If we had to explain why we chose every word we chose this mode of communication would be useless.