You pretend I am invisible and ignore my comments, while targeting me with a long post, when I have never interacted…
Oh wow unblocking me right now. Pick a struggle. Why would I defend and join you blindly praising or commenting about the screenwriter, director or producer? The reading comprehension thrown out of the window with the last sentence as you don't seem to get that I don't have a problem with AM.
@/Xiang83 decided to block me so to those wondering why I will not be able to reply, this is the reason.
She decided to post her attacks with the "protection" of spoiler tag but now that her post was defended against, she seem not to allow it.
Please refrain from writing fictional stories about HMH and I will be calling you out again. And of course, she will again police everyone here who questions the FL's age with this romantic role.....
Edit: I admit that how I constructed some of my words before are confrontational in response to the subtly shading of her posts due to her countless justification about the underage casting and she don't allow anyone to question the underage FL acting in a romance drama. I am overstimulated when I posted it but now I am calm and used an appropriate approach to discussion.
Credits to @/Thadheilly for her reply to you as it sums up your responses to everyone who disagrees with you here:
"Your recent responses have provided a very instructive example of the communication patterns you regularly display, which I’ve seen repeated across the threads and various interactions.
You clearly invest time and energy into crafting your comments, but it’s precisely this pattern, the long-winded, overly intellectualized replies filled with tangents and inflated language, that highlights a deeper behavioral tendency: an avoidance of direct engagement. Your style functions less as dialogue and more as a monologue designed to obscure, deflect, and provoke.
These patterns are problematic for constructive discussion With your passive-aggressive communication rather than addressing criticism or disagreement head-on, you tend to reply through vague superiority, indirect barbs, and excessive verbiage. This creates the illusion of civility while still managing to belittle or antagonize others. The result? No real resolution, only performative clarity.
In your narcissistic presentation of ideas there is a noticeable tendency to elevate your perspective as if it were inherently more informed, more reasonable, or simply above critique. When challenged, the typical response is not openness but thinly veiled contempt — or worse, subtle manipulation that frames dissent as ignorance or bad faith.
You use deflection and gaslighting time and again, when you shift the conversation away from the issue at hand, inserting unrelated references, over-contextualized narratives, or academic-style justifications, not to support a point, but to avoid having to answer for the initial concern. This not only derails discussion but attempts to make others feel as though they misunderstood or misrepresented what was “clearly explained.”
You have verbosity and communication overload (logorrhea). You often overload your responses with unnecessary detail, obscure references, or language that serves no clear communicative purpose beyond exhausting your interlocutor. Whether intentional or compulsive, this is not discourse, it's domination by word count.
And lastly provocation followed by victimization. This is the most persistent and telling pattern. When responses begin to reflect frustration, quite justifiably, given the above, you pivot to victimhood. Suddenly, you are the one being attacked, misunderstood, or "bullied by groupthink." It’s a convenient switch: provoke, derail, then moralize about being targeted. This creates an emotionally manipulative loop that shields you from accountability and reframes the conversation around your hurt feelings rather than your own behavior.
These behaviors do not foster dialogue; they dismantle it under the guise of intellectual engagement. And they do not go unnoticed, not by your critics, and certainly not by the neutral observers you may believe you are winning over with performative reasoning.
Your comments speak for themselves, just as mine will. I hope at some point you’ll be willing to examine the actual impact of your approach, not just its intent or presentation.
Wishing you clarity, and a more constructive outlet for your energy."
Edit: I edited this to make a calm stance and provide a more calm approach. I apologize to you @/Xiang83 if I hurt you from my previous and now I corrected it but my stance still stands.
Would have swayed 39 y.o. me who likes unbiased opinion. But by reading the entirety of them, it was obvious criticism…
Of course, it's still one's choice if they want to reply ahaha! You know how she sounded every essay so even if I composed and outdo her with 50 paragraphs essay, I will just be wasting my time skskksssk.
Would have swayed 39 y.o. me who likes unbiased opinion. But by reading the entirety of them, it was obvious criticism…
The fact that you took time to read those nonsense essays 🫂. The account is full of arrogance she doesn't know how delusional she sounded every comment.
Definitely needs to get called out especially when she defends the FL casting like her life depends on it + nonstop yapping about AM's emoting/acting skills (tbh I couldn't care less who she praises but she needs to get some reality check when she dragged HMH into it). After I read that same yaps before, I stopped paying attention to her essays. It's why I didn't even know what a mess she is creating in the mdl page.
I was actually dmed about this mess. I was not the one to found out such laughable delusional takes from that account. You know me, I'm more on the tolerant side but this account touched the bottom line. If they go low, I go lower.
The ridiculous takes of this account (@/Xiang83) was beyond ridiculous at best. I've been holding out on your ridiculous takes for so long and I think you need to be called out. You are posting such ridiculous comments/make up stories about HMH and you hide it under the protection of the "spoiler tag". You also monopolized the comment section, restricting any healthy discussions, and spamming. You don't like and don't allow any not-so-good opinions about AM and don't want anyone questioning why is she starring in a romance drama despite being underage/minor. You also belittle him while uplifting others. You also asked me why I am not defending the director, screenwriter or producer as if I should show blind flattery. I am asking for a restraint and respect as you seem to have show preference to AM. Sure you can go and advocate about your underage girly who is actually riding HMH's coattails for this drama to even be approved by the platform. HMH is getting the huge disservice being partnered to this zyk underage actress. He gets attacked left and right for her age and the FL can just sit back and relax, reap the benefits while being promoted.
AM literally looking like a kid playing dress up in woman's clothes trying so badly to get the image that "I am not a kid, guys be convinced I can act this out". Tbh, imho she should not be here playing this romantic role and don't give me your reasons again from before. The other age appropriate actresses + their cheerful vibes combo who vied for this FL role are the ones suitable. But yes, thanks to their weak agencies, they did not get the chance. You are also bragging about her veteran experience despite being in a young age but we can see that she is with her performance teacher (acting coach) in tow in this drama and is teaching her how to emote properly . Meanwhile, you are implying that HMH has never emoted like the way before downgrading him as you see the director instructing him (a usual occurrence in filming dramas as they guide the actors). Of course, you will not see AM's reuters that often because they are not like HMH's fans who can buy it everyday. You don't even know how she is getting instructed by the director how to properly act the scene out because her fans can't buy the reuters so you are unable to see for yourself.
Edit: I edited this to make a calm stance and provide a more calm approach. I apologize to you @/Xiang83 if I hurt you from my previous and now I corrected it but my stance still stands. I admit that how I constructed some of my words before are confrontational in response to the subtly shading of your posts due to your countless justification to AM and she don't allow anyone to question the underage FL acting in a romance drama. I am overstimulated when I posted it but now I am calm and used an appropriate approach to discussion.
1 
3 
4 
1 
1 
1 
She decided to post her attacks with the "protection" of spoiler tag but now that her post was defended against, she seem not to allow it.
Please refrain from writing fictional stories about HMH and I will be calling you out again. And of course, she will again police everyone here who questions the FL's age with this romantic role.....
Edit: I admit that how I constructed some of my words before are confrontational in response to the subtly shading of her posts due to her countless justification about the underage casting and she don't allow anyone to question the underage FL acting in a romance drama. I am overstimulated when I posted it but now I am calm and used an appropriate approach to discussion.
Credits to @/Thadheilly for her reply to you as it sums up your responses to everyone who disagrees with you here:
"Your recent responses have provided a very instructive example of the communication patterns you regularly display, which I’ve seen repeated across the threads and various interactions.
You clearly invest time and energy into crafting your comments, but it’s precisely this pattern, the long-winded, overly intellectualized replies filled with tangents and inflated language, that highlights a deeper behavioral tendency: an avoidance of direct engagement. Your style functions less as dialogue and more as a monologue designed to obscure, deflect, and provoke.
These patterns are problematic for constructive discussion
With your passive-aggressive communication rather than addressing criticism or disagreement head-on, you tend to reply through vague superiority, indirect barbs, and excessive verbiage. This creates the illusion of civility while still managing to belittle or antagonize others. The result? No real resolution, only performative clarity.
In your narcissistic presentation of ideas there is a noticeable tendency to elevate your perspective as if it were inherently more informed, more reasonable, or simply above critique. When challenged, the typical response is not openness but thinly veiled contempt — or worse, subtle manipulation that frames dissent as ignorance or bad faith.
You use deflection and gaslighting time and again, when you shift the conversation away from the issue at hand, inserting unrelated references, over-contextualized narratives, or academic-style justifications, not to support a point, but to avoid having to answer for the initial concern. This not only derails discussion but attempts to make others feel as though they misunderstood or misrepresented what was “clearly explained.”
You have verbosity and communication overload (logorrhea).
You often overload your responses with unnecessary detail, obscure references, or language that serves no clear communicative purpose beyond exhausting your interlocutor. Whether intentional or compulsive, this is not discourse, it's domination by word count.
And lastly provocation followed by victimization.
This is the most persistent and telling pattern. When responses begin to reflect frustration, quite justifiably, given the above, you pivot to victimhood. Suddenly, you are the one being attacked, misunderstood, or "bullied by groupthink." It’s a convenient switch: provoke, derail, then moralize about being targeted. This creates an emotionally manipulative loop that shields you from accountability and reframes the conversation around your hurt feelings rather than your own behavior.
These behaviors do not foster dialogue; they dismantle it under the guise of intellectual engagement. And they do not go unnoticed, not by your critics, and certainly not by the neutral observers you may believe you are winning over with performative reasoning.
Your comments speak for themselves, just as mine will. I hope at some point you’ll be willing to examine the actual impact of your approach, not just its intent or presentation.
Wishing you clarity, and a more constructive outlet for your energy."
Edit: I edited this to make a calm stance and provide a more calm approach. I apologize to you @/Xiang83 if I hurt you from my previous and now I corrected it but my stance still stands.
After I read that same yaps before, I stopped paying attention to her essays. It's why I didn't even know what a mess she is creating in the mdl page.
😂😂😂 girly is fuming
AM literally looking like a kid playing dress up in woman's clothes trying so badly to get the image that "I am not a kid, guys be convinced I can act this out". Tbh, imho she should not be here playing this romantic role and don't give me your reasons again from before. The other age appropriate actresses + their cheerful vibes combo who vied for this FL role are the ones suitable. But yes, thanks to their weak agencies, they did not get the chance. You are also bragging about her veteran experience despite being in a young age but we can see that she is with her performance teacher (acting coach) in tow in this drama and is teaching her how to emote properly . Meanwhile, you are implying that HMH has never emoted like the way before downgrading him as you see the director instructing him (a usual occurrence in filming dramas as they guide the actors). Of course, you will not see AM's reuters that often because they are not like HMH's fans who can buy it everyday. You don't even know how she is getting instructed by the director how to properly act the scene out because her fans can't buy the reuters so you are unable to see for yourself.
Edit: I edited this to make a calm stance and provide a more calm approach. I apologize to you @/Xiang83 if I hurt you from my previous and now I corrected it but my stance still stands. I admit that how I constructed some of my words before are confrontational in response to the subtly shading of your posts due to your countless justification to AM and she don't allow anyone to question the underage FL acting in a romance drama. I am overstimulated when I posted it but now I am calm and used an appropriate approach to discussion.