Clearly you do, or you wouldn’t bother coming here to post.
I do it for amusement. You’re a monkey flinging feces, and I’m standing far away.
Yet again, I make points that are ignored or otherwise not refuted, Turbo ends up cursing at me, while I remain imminently polite in my posts, and yet you think I am the bitter man flinging feces. I am in fact the reasonable man trying to have a legitimate discussion.
Textbook sealioning. You are really nailing it.
“Sea lion: I have been unfailingly polite, and you two have been nothing but rude.”
You are arguing with folks who are in favor of group punishment and group reward as long as they stand to benefit from collective action politically. You also know they can barely read.
I never said that you have been nothing but rude. I said you were rude, when you called something I wrote bullshit. You have just misstated what I did, therefore this point fails.
From Wiki: sealioning - type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with persistent requests for evidence or repeated questions, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity. It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate.
I am not harassing you. You replied to a single sentence I wrote instead of the whole of my argument, and ignored my point. If it’s not allowable for someone to have a follow up in order to continue a discussion, what is the point of it? The definition mentions a “pretense”. I am not maintaining a pretense, I am truly trying to be civil. I have also not been incessant, nor acted in bad-faith, because actually I am interested in having a meaningful discussion.
I am “nailing” nothing in regards to sealioning.
Ssealioning is sometimes hard to pin down, but if somebody asked me for a textbook example, I would point to what you are doing.
I quoted the original Wondermark sea lion cartoon you microcephalic dipshit.
Do it explain it then, because I am simply responding to an accusation from Turbo.
I don’t see any Wondermark sea lion cartoon.
You just linked to a quote that links to what I just linked to on Wiki. I am fully aware of the definition, and don’t think what I am doing meets that. That’s what I’m asking Riemann.
Yes, the tune where I was having a discussion and I just wanted an answer. Same thing as here. Again, am I not allowed a follow up question if someone fails to respond? It’s not like I asked him the same thing over and over and demanded an answer. If we all responded to others, and knew that other person essentially had no right to follow up, one could say anything and claim they won the argument. How interesting would that be?
Post-of-the-Month Award™ goes to @Riemann for this one: 
Poor widdle Peghead, nobody wants to share their ball. Can’t blame them for not wanting to play his game.
This is rather brilliant, actually. Sealioning me with a video of a sealion. Nice!
I’m not accusing you of sea lioning, but for what it’s worth, here’s the cartoon:
Discourse is telling me that it was already posted on September 20th in this very thread! How very useful of Discourse.
Yeah. It’s crazy how he kept asking, over and over, ever so politely, for something that had already been provided and was very easy to find even if it hadn’t been provided.
I wonder if there’s a term for that kind of behavior.