I’ll keep voting third party. Thanks! By the way, you aren’t just a “crank,” you’re an outright dick to people on Lemmy. I don’t know what your deal is, but you’re easily one of the biggest jerks I’ve ever witnessed on Lemmy. I’ve seen you advocate violence, stalking, troll accusations, etc. I don’t know what you got going on in your real life, but dude…
The problem with that, is on the few times you aren’t ranting or calling people names, I can’t take ya seriously. And I know you’re ok with that too. So all good.
There are fun chaos trolls, ragebaiters, etc. But you, oy. You are the unhappiest person I have ever come across on the internet. And I’m fucking old. So I think you are either fake and you are trying to confuse people because you work for foreign agents, or you have some condition that makes you chronically bitchy. Either way, nah, I don’t believe a word you are saying. And you worship the duopoly.
I invite you to bring receipts for any of those shrill claims, because it’s inevitably going to be a couple shrugs about Charlie Kirk, and then nothing. Glib frustration with infuriating nonsense, which you’ve somehow twisted up into lurid allegations about… stalking? I cannot even guess what the fuck inspired that fantasy. And you put ‘troll accusations’ in the same breath. Bit of a disconnect, yeah? Arson, murder, jaywalking? I gladly admit to calling people trolls, when they’re trolling.
Like when they just make shit up and don’t have an argument.
Like this directed abuse in the absence of fact.
At no point were you asked to believe me. That denial is a confession. It speaks to a worldview fixated on interpersonal loyalty, where things are true because a trusted person says them. You’ll never agree with me because claims from the outgroup are automatically wrong. That tribalism is the core of conservatism. You don’t have an answer, and that doesn’t bother you, because you’ve already drawn me as the soyjak, and apparently that’s all you think there is to reality. What a shame there’s no way for opposing claims to be settled by lookin’.
Anyone can look at your post history, you’re removed comments, and see how you are. Brah, you know it and you’re proud of it. I don’t even know why you are denying it, since you wear it as a badge of pride.
Ohhh, Universal Monk slandered me again. No, an obvious exaggeration about instance-owners escalating their discouragement against Lemmy’s most block-evading troll is not somehow an endorsement of crimes, you adorable little dingus. You adorable vote-manipulating sockpuppet, if we glance at your own modlog and pretend that’s infallible.
So your whole ‘we know you’ schtick is just one guy clutching pearls about me saying what an asshole he is, huh? That’s disappointing. When I argue with sugar_in_your_tea, there’s notes. In our previous interaction he kinda defended actual Nazi newspapers, and I’ll give the benefit of context and nuance, but that shit’s coming up again. You play a weak game if you wanna come out accusing someone of murder fantasies and gangstalking, and your whole basis is - ‘but a tankie said so!’
Meanwhile, you’ve done less than nothing to distnguish yourself from any other conservative. You want to label me, and pretend that’s a substitute for any form of counterargument. Like. The whole accusation was, y’all just sneer at outsiders based on this ideology-as-identity, and reach for excuses to justify that kneejerk conclusion.
And your rebuttal was to do that three times in a row.
I don’t know who the sugar tea monk guy is, but by the sound of your rant, you’re proving my point. I don’t even know where your nazi newspapers example is coming from, or what you’re talking about. I’m not even talking about newspaper?! What?!
We’re talking about you being a jerk and now you are talking about how you read nazi newspapers?! WTF?!
Is your reply meant for me or for someone else?! You sound like you are having an entirely different conversation than what we were talking about.
I knew you were a jerk, but I didn’t know you were a nazi. You read nazi newspapers and brag about it. Fits your presonality, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. Of course you are a nazi. Have you ever heard of the nazi bar? You’re who they talk about. I bet u worship Trump too. Eww, I don’t deal with fascists. Yuck, go away.
I kinda did though, but I do think they’re misrepresenting it. It was in a different thread in a different context. I honestly didn’t recognize the user was the same because I don’t keep track of usernames unless they’re an obvious troll.
I was arguing for a “wait and see” approach to federation saying we don’t have enough evidence to say maga.place is bad enough to defederate. The evidence presented was the domain name (90% seemed to stop there) and posts in their conservative community using sketchy sources and nothing about their admins or mods.
The discussion shifted to the sources themselves, and they asked whether I’d support a ban on “Der Sturmer” (Nazi publication prior to WWII) and I said no, but I wouldn’t read it because I don’t like obvious propaganda. I don’t believe in banning any media and instead think good media should crowd out the bad. I’d say the same for any extremist propaganda because freedom of speech is very important to me.
I think it was meant as a gotcha question, since that seems to be how that user argues. I absolutely don’t read or support any Nazi anything, but I will defend their right to publish just as I would for anything else I disagree with.
Disinformation is not erased by correction. Brains don’t work that way. Reactionary radicalization must be prevented, because curing it is a thousand times harder. This is protecting people from harm through speech, as much as censoring directed threats or bigoted abuse. Polite phrasing on intolerable beliefs is just mobster speak: ‘it would be a shame if anything happened to your children.’
I think it was meant as a gotcha question
It was meant as a universal touchstone. Surely, I thought, everybody recognizes literal nazi propaganda should have been stopped, at some point. But no: that obvious extreme was met with milquetoast ‘well I wouldn’t read it.’ Neither did the Jews, buddy. Didn’t help. Systemic problems aren’t about you.
By the by, calling pointed questions “gotchas” is also a conservative tactic. I opened gently with acknowledgement that at one point the nazi party was just some schmucks. But not only did you suggest the problem with pro-holocaust propaganda was sourcing, you outright invited modern fascists to the table, so long as their racism is scientific racism. You can’t wedge yourself under a low bar and claim it was a trap.
I don’t think I was wrong. My beliefs haven’t changed, and I stand by everything I said. My opinion of you hasn’t changed whatsoever. But I also recognize that this isn’t my community, so I will abide by the rules. But nah, fam, nothing has changed on my end. :)
I’ll keep voting third party. Thanks! By the way, you aren’t just a “crank,” you’re an outright dick to people on Lemmy. I don’t know what your deal is, but you’re easily one of the biggest jerks I’ve ever witnessed on Lemmy. I’ve seen you advocate violence, stalking, troll accusations, etc. I don’t know what you got going on in your real life, but dude…
The problem with that, is on the few times you aren’t ranting or calling people names, I can’t take ya seriously. And I know you’re ok with that too. So all good.
There are fun chaos trolls, ragebaiters, etc. But you, oy. You are the unhappiest person I have ever come across on the internet. And I’m fucking old. So I think you are either fake and you are trying to confuse people because you work for foreign agents, or you have some condition that makes you chronically bitchy. Either way, nah, I don’t believe a word you are saying. And you worship the duopoly.
I invite you to bring receipts for any of those shrill claims, because it’s inevitably going to be a couple shrugs about Charlie Kirk, and then nothing. Glib frustration with infuriating nonsense, which you’ve somehow twisted up into lurid allegations about… stalking? I cannot even guess what the fuck inspired that fantasy. And you put ‘troll accusations’ in the same breath. Bit of a disconnect, yeah? Arson, murder, jaywalking? I gladly admit to calling people trolls, when they’re trolling.
Like when they just make shit up and don’t have an argument.
Like this directed abuse in the absence of fact.
At no point were you asked to believe me. That denial is a confession. It speaks to a worldview fixated on interpersonal loyalty, where things are true because a trusted person says them. You’ll never agree with me because claims from the outgroup are automatically wrong. That tribalism is the core of conservatism. You don’t have an answer, and that doesn’t bother you, because you’ve already drawn me as the soyjak, and apparently that’s all you think there is to reality. What a shame there’s no way for opposing claims to be settled by lookin’.
Anyone can look at your post history, you’re removed comments, and see how you are. Brah, you know it and you’re proud of it. I don’t even know why you are denying it, since you wear it as a badge of pride.
Also, I’m not conservative. thx
Ohhh, Universal Monk slandered me again. No, an obvious exaggeration about instance-owners escalating their discouragement against Lemmy’s most block-evading troll is not somehow an endorsement of crimes, you adorable little dingus. You adorable vote-manipulating sockpuppet, if we glance at your own modlog and pretend that’s infallible.
So your whole ‘we know you’ schtick is just one guy clutching pearls about me saying what an asshole he is, huh? That’s disappointing. When I argue with sugar_in_your_tea, there’s notes. In our previous interaction he kinda defended actual Nazi newspapers, and I’ll give the benefit of context and nuance, but that shit’s coming up again. You play a weak game if you wanna come out accusing someone of murder fantasies and gangstalking, and your whole basis is - ‘but a tankie said so!’
Meanwhile, you’ve done less than nothing to distnguish yourself from any other conservative. You want to label me, and pretend that’s a substitute for any form of counterargument. Like. The whole accusation was, y’all just sneer at outsiders based on this ideology-as-identity, and reach for excuses to justify that kneejerk conclusion.
And your rebuttal was to do that three times in a row.
I don’t know who the sugar tea monk guy is, but by the sound of your rant, you’re proving my point. I don’t even know where your nazi newspapers example is coming from, or what you’re talking about. I’m not even talking about newspaper?! What?!
We’re talking about you being a jerk and now you are talking about how you read nazi newspapers?! WTF?!
Is your reply meant for me or for someone else?! You sound like you are having an entirely different conversation than what we were talking about.
I knew you were a jerk, but I didn’t know you were a nazi. You read nazi newspapers and brag about it. Fits your presonality, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. Of course you are a nazi. Have you ever heard of the nazi bar? You’re who they talk about. I bet u worship Trump too. Eww, I don’t deal with fascists. Yuck, go away.
They’re an odd sort of troll.
Could you please cool it? We really don’t need these kinds of personal attacks.
I disagree with this person too, but that doesn’t make it okay to slander them. Attack arguments, not people.
Understood. But when he said that about your conversation with him, I got annoyed, because you’ve never defended any Nazi newspapers.
But you’re right, no need to stoop to their level.
I kinda did though, but I do think they’re misrepresenting it. It was in a different thread in a different context. I honestly didn’t recognize the user was the same because I don’t keep track of usernames unless they’re an obvious troll.
Here’s the discussion.
I was arguing for a “wait and see” approach to federation saying we don’t have enough evidence to say maga.place is bad enough to defederate. The evidence presented was the domain name (90% seemed to stop there) and posts in their conservative community using sketchy sources and nothing about their admins or mods.
The discussion shifted to the sources themselves, and they asked whether I’d support a ban on “Der Sturmer” (Nazi publication prior to WWII) and I said no, but I wouldn’t read it because I don’t like obvious propaganda. I don’t believe in banning any media and instead think good media should crowd out the bad. I’d say the same for any extremist propaganda because freedom of speech is very important to me.
I think it was meant as a gotcha question, since that seems to be how that user argues. I absolutely don’t read or support any Nazi anything, but I will defend their right to publish just as I would for anything else I disagree with.
Does should mean will?
Disinformation is not erased by correction. Brains don’t work that way. Reactionary radicalization must be prevented, because curing it is a thousand times harder. This is protecting people from harm through speech, as much as censoring directed threats or bigoted abuse. Polite phrasing on intolerable beliefs is just mobster speak: ‘it would be a shame if anything happened to your children.’
It was meant as a universal touchstone. Surely, I thought, everybody recognizes literal nazi propaganda should have been stopped, at some point. But no: that obvious extreme was met with milquetoast ‘well I wouldn’t read it.’ Neither did the Jews, buddy. Didn’t help. Systemic problems aren’t about you.
By the by, calling pointed questions “gotchas” is also a conservative tactic. I opened gently with acknowledgement that at one point the nazi party was just some schmucks. But not only did you suggest the problem with pro-holocaust propaganda was sourcing, you outright invited modern fascists to the table, so long as their racism is scientific racism. You can’t wedge yourself under a low bar and claim it was a trap.
My level being an accurate reference to specific events I’m prepared to source.
When you recognize you were wrong, your beliefs are supposed to change.
I don’t think I was wrong. My beliefs haven’t changed, and I stand by everything I said. My opinion of you hasn’t changed whatsoever. But I also recognize that this isn’t my community, so I will abide by the rules. But nah, fam, nothing has changed on my end. :)
Word salad.
Good day.
I’m not gonna take anything you say seriously. And you are against third parties. So nah, fam. We ain’t gonna be friends.
You are functionally illiterate.
This is true most days, so yeah, I can cop to that! :)