Yeah I've left the site for here... after the 6th of jan it went by the way of bannon.. ie hey we will get em in 2022... yeah no... it's now or it ain't happenin
It's gotten very aggressive, and you absolutely cannot disagree with someone without risking endless ad homeium attacks. It's definitely not my cup of tea. However, if that's how they want to run their community, that's their choice. But I worry that they turn a lot of people off.
The problem comes when people start interpreting respectful. What if people disagree with what is considered respectful. What if people decide it’s disrespectful to discuss Q posts and theories. Just like hate speech. What is hate speech. How does one regulate such a thing. It’s just dangerous to restrict speech at all. That’s why we have free speech in our country. Or used to.
Because the end result patently would not be free speech; it’d be the exact opposite. It would, in certain fact, be the end of this community, and the end of the ability to talk about Q online.
IMO, when someone's opening Salvo is ad homeium attacks on a question or a well thought response citing different sources of information, that you've gathered from your own research, then that person isn't being respectful. People come here wanting to learn. Its OK if they disagree, or have conflicting information. Have a discussion. Check their comment history. Consider their arguments. Look at their sources. Share your sources.
No doubt. I have no problem with the idea of being respectful. Everyone should be respectful. Its just the matter of forcing people to do something. They should do it because its right, and because people will shun them for doing wrong, not because they are forced into submission.
AHS on reddit also misinterprets what "ban evasion" means
the reality is they know better, but being honest about knowing better doesn't come with power like throwing around accusations and running to your mod buddy does
100% agree. It's frustrating that when anyone asks a question or brings up conflicting information, the response is often character attacks. We are supposed to do our own research, and to me that means discussions involving conflicting information. I love a good debate. When someone goes straight for "you're a shill" (or worse) I wonder if they feel confident in their beliefs. People get things wrong, and that's OK. What's not ok is not even considering another's perspective.
the problem are those who "dont debate anyone who argues in bad faith" and then when you present a well put together message and they don't know how to respond, the default on "Holy shit you people are insane" or "Did you have a stroke while typing that out?" or "Oh so because you want lower taxes that makes it okay to rape and genocide poor black people?" as the old "rules of the internet" states, Rule 11: All of your carefully picked arguments can be easily ignored
The worst part is how effective this bullshit debate style is. God forbid you try to spin it on them, they pipe up "haha you can't defend your position so you default to personal attacks, fascism much?" but of course also "No, me calling you a retarded Nazi, isn't dehumanizing like you calling me a shill is."
I'm not trying to sound thin skinned, and I know it is futile to debate shills, but it just sucks how effective their tactics are on people who claim to be immune to propganda. Slowly but surely all forums turn into Reddit.
Yep, and what people don't realize is that by jumping straight to the type of comments you've quoted, they are engaging in their own form of silencing. Attacking people for asking questions or having a different opinion is very much the same as saying you must adhere to the party line and that you can't think for yourself Which is the complete opposite of what this community stands for, which is DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.
I have always been one to play devils advocate as a way of checking the validity if my beliefs and knowledge. But you do it by respectfully stating how and WHY you have a different opinion. We must ALWAYS be willing to consider that we are wrong. Are some people making bad faith arguments or shills? Sure, but don't immediately assume that just because they disagree with you.
Just because you CAN say something, doesn't mean you SHOULD. The Donald has every right to be what they are. The question is, what are their goals? Expanding their community? Being accurate even if the truth might be uncomfortable?Or just silencing anyone who disagrees in the slightest? In a lot of ways its become its own echo chamber over there.
Yeah I've left the site for here... after the 6th of jan it went by the way of bannon.. ie hey we will get em in 2022... yeah no... it's now or it ain't happenin
It's gotten very aggressive, and you absolutely cannot disagree with someone without risking endless ad homeium attacks. It's definitely not my cup of tea. However, if that's how they want to run their community, that's their choice. But I worry that they turn a lot of people off.
The problem comes when people start interpreting respectful. What if people disagree with what is considered respectful. What if people decide it’s disrespectful to discuss Q posts and theories. Just like hate speech. What is hate speech. How does one regulate such a thing. It’s just dangerous to restrict speech at all. That’s why we have free speech in our country. Or used to.
On a “platform”, yes.
This isn’t a “platform”, it’s a community.
The mods are the backstop.
Not everything goes.
Thank goodness.
Because the end result patently would not be free speech; it’d be the exact opposite. It would, in certain fact, be the end of this community, and the end of the ability to talk about Q online.
To deny that is to deny reality.
IMO, when someone's opening Salvo is ad homeium attacks on a question or a well thought response citing different sources of information, that you've gathered from your own research, then that person isn't being respectful. People come here wanting to learn. Its OK if they disagree, or have conflicting information. Have a discussion. Check their comment history. Consider their arguments. Look at their sources. Share your sources.
No doubt. I have no problem with the idea of being respectful. Everyone should be respectful. Its just the matter of forcing people to do something. They should do it because its right, and because people will shun them for doing wrong, not because they are forced into submission.
What in the fuck did your bitch ass just say to me?
/s
AHS on reddit also misinterprets what "ban evasion" means
the reality is they know better, but being honest about knowing better doesn't come with power like throwing around accusations and running to your mod buddy does
100% agree. It's frustrating that when anyone asks a question or brings up conflicting information, the response is often character attacks. We are supposed to do our own research, and to me that means discussions involving conflicting information. I love a good debate. When someone goes straight for "you're a shill" (or worse) I wonder if they feel confident in their beliefs. People get things wrong, and that's OK. What's not ok is not even considering another's perspective.
the problem are those who "dont debate anyone who argues in bad faith" and then when you present a well put together message and they don't know how to respond, the default on "Holy shit you people are insane" or "Did you have a stroke while typing that out?" or "Oh so because you want lower taxes that makes it okay to rape and genocide poor black people?" as the old "rules of the internet" states, Rule 11: All of your carefully picked arguments can be easily ignored
The worst part is how effective this bullshit debate style is. God forbid you try to spin it on them, they pipe up "haha you can't defend your position so you default to personal attacks, fascism much?" but of course also "No, me calling you a retarded Nazi, isn't dehumanizing like you calling me a shill is."
I'm not trying to sound thin skinned, and I know it is futile to debate shills, but it just sucks how effective their tactics are on people who claim to be immune to propganda. Slowly but surely all forums turn into Reddit.
Yep, and what people don't realize is that by jumping straight to the type of comments you've quoted, they are engaging in their own form of silencing. Attacking people for asking questions or having a different opinion is very much the same as saying you must adhere to the party line and that you can't think for yourself Which is the complete opposite of what this community stands for, which is DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.
I have always been one to play devils advocate as a way of checking the validity if my beliefs and knowledge. But you do it by respectfully stating how and WHY you have a different opinion. We must ALWAYS be willing to consider that we are wrong. Are some people making bad faith arguments or shills? Sure, but don't immediately assume that just because they disagree with you.
Perfect way of putting it
That’s what she said.
damb, i walked into that one
She also said that, as she walked past, approximately 12 inches away.
Again, this mof nails it like he nailed your mom last night.
Aldo, I, too, love the Pepe memes. They make me smile.
You make valid points, I have to admit.
Especially the point about your mom, and it being “open season”.
It’s all good.
Much love to you, and the (sugar) mommas.
Bitch, you ain’t lyin. That’s the truth here.
Just because you CAN say something, doesn't mean you SHOULD. The Donald has every right to be what they are. The question is, what are their goals? Expanding their community? Being accurate even if the truth might be uncomfortable?Or just silencing anyone who disagrees in the slightest? In a lot of ways its become its own echo chamber over there.