6 ms·

It's a statement written for Chinese Authorities. This twitter thread analyzes it pretty well. https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352 https://tw

It's a statement written for Chinese Authorities. This twitter thread analyzes it pretty well. https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352 https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352

chii 7y ago
that's a really good and thorough analysis.
FDSGSG 7y ago
>See the date. As others have noted, even thought this post was on Friday, which was the 11th, the date on the post is the 12th, indicating that it was posted from overseas, possibly China. That's not a big deal in and of itself, but let's me talk about how these things are done. Ah yes, UTC == China. Very reasonable logic here! This post was almost certainly made on Fri Oct 11 2019 17:18:58 PDT from Irvine, CA. Every single post on that site has the timestamp in UTC format, this is an utterly ridiculous conspiracy theory. Either Mark Kern is misleading on purpose or he's a complete moron.
- dzamie 7y ago
  Speaking of misleading on purpose, you're using that a very small portion of his argument is probably inaccurate as strong evidence that the entire argument is wholly incorrect. It's as though someone just finished explaining why vaccines are believed not to cause autism, and you respond "actually, this particular study you cited surveyed 924 people, not a thousand like you said. Looks like the pro-vax cult can't seem to stop lying!"
  - FDSGSG 7y ago
    >It's as though someone just finished explaining why vaccines are believed not to cause autism, and you respond "actually, this particular study you cited surveyed 924 people, not a thousand like you said. Looks like the pro-vax cult can't seem to stop lying!" That'd be a mistake, or just poor wording. It kind of sounds like you're accusing me of some kind of silly pedantry here? There's simply no way one could mistakenly arrive at the conclusion that this post might have originated from China, Mark Kern absolutely knew what he was doing when he dropped that insinuation. There's simply does not exist a single shred of evidence to support the "possibly China" claim. Had he just left it at "overseas" then you could absolutely dismiss this as a mere mistake, he did not.
    - Supermancho 7y ago
      It also could have been a date based on last edit. There are so many possibilities, that it is suspect. Fair point. Unlike you, I don't think it's all that important a detail as its omission (mistake or not) does not detract from the analysis. Not to get too meta, but if it was intentional, why would it necessarily be, since it's so incidental to the narrative?
      - FDSGSG 7y ago
        >Not to get too meta, but if it was intentional, why would it necessarily be, since it's so incidental to the narrative? The decision to add "possibly China" despite no evidence pointing towards that was certainly intentional and in bad faith. >Unlike you, I don't think it's all that important a detail as its omission (mistake or not) does not detract from the analysis. I think his choice to deliberately misinform is worth being called out whether or not it detracts from the rest of the analysis. It's clear that this thread wasn't written in good faith. The rest of his analysis is uninteresting and not worthy of much criticism, he's mostly correct, but a HS student could come up with this stuff.
        Supermancho 7y ago
        It isnt possibly India. There is circumstantial evidence that it could be due to Chinese influence. The blanket interpretation ignoring context is not compelling. GL
        FDSGSG 7y ago
        > It isnt possibly India. It's just as much "possibly India" as it's "possibly China", there's literally zero evidence (circumstantial or not) suggesting that the post originated from either. > could be due to Chinese influence Completely different from the suggestion that the post was literally made in China. I'm sure absolutely nobody doubts that this post was made due to Chinese influence, it is the claim that the post physically originated from China which I find fundamentally ridiculous.
- joshstrange 7y ago
  > Either Mark Kern is misleading on purpose or he's a complete moron. Out of 33 tweets he makes a single mistake/overreach and you want to brand the whole thing as a "ridiculous conspiracy theory"? That seems to be a rather hasty generalization based on the 2nd of 33 tweets...
  - FDSGSG 7y ago
    Mark Kern is a gamergater primarily known for his really bad takes, this is not a hasty generalization. >brand the whole thing as a "ridiculous conspiracy theory"? Oh no, I just stopped reading after I reached the ridiculous conspiracy theory. My comment is regarding the part I quoted.
  - root_axis 7y ago
    I think it's fair to disregard the analysis at that point since the author demonstrates they cannot necessarily be trusted to interpret the facts.
- UserIsUnused 7y ago
  Do yourself a favor and finish reading the chain
  - FDSGSG 7y ago
    I have now done that, my opinion remains unchanged.
    - UserIsUnused 7y ago
      Thanks.

chii 7y ago

that's a really good and thorough analysis.

FDSGSG 7y ago

>See the date. As others have noted, even thought this post was on Friday, which was the 11th, the date on the post is the 12th, indicating that it was posted from overseas, possibly China. That's not a big deal in and of itself, but let's me talk about how these things are done. Ah yes, UTC == China. Very reasonable logic here! This post was almost certainly made on Fri Oct 11 2019 17:18:58 PDT from Irvine, CA. Every single post on that site has the timestamp in UTC format, this is an utterly ridiculous conspiracy theory. Either Mark Kern is misleading on purpose or he's a complete moron.

dzamie 7y ago
Speaking of misleading on purpose, you're using that a very small portion of his argument is probably inaccurate as strong evidence that the entire argument is wholly incorrect. It's as though someone just finished explaining why vaccines are believed not to cause autism, and you respond "actually, this particular study you cited surveyed 924 people, not a thousand like you said. Looks like the pro-vax cult can't seem to stop lying!"
- FDSGSG 7y ago
  >It's as though someone just finished explaining why vaccines are believed not to cause autism, and you respond "actually, this particular study you cited surveyed 924 people, not a thousand like you said. Looks like the pro-vax cult can't seem to stop lying!" That'd be a mistake, or just poor wording. It kind of sounds like you're accusing me of some kind of silly pedantry here? There's simply no way one could mistakenly arrive at the conclusion that this post might have originated from China, Mark Kern absolutely knew what he was doing when he dropped that insinuation. There's simply does not exist a single shred of evidence to support the "possibly China" claim. Had he just left it at "overseas" then you could absolutely dismiss this as a mere mistake, he did not.
  - Supermancho 7y ago
    It also could have been a date based on last edit. There are so many possibilities, that it is suspect. Fair point. Unlike you, I don't think it's all that important a detail as its omission (mistake or not) does not detract from the analysis. Not to get too meta, but if it was intentional, why would it necessarily be, since it's so incidental to the narrative?
    - FDSGSG 7y ago
      >Not to get too meta, but if it was intentional, why would it necessarily be, since it's so incidental to the narrative? The decision to add "possibly China" despite no evidence pointing towards that was certainly intentional and in bad faith. >Unlike you, I don't think it's all that important a detail as its omission (mistake or not) does not detract from the analysis. I think his choice to deliberately misinform is worth being called out whether or not it detracts from the rest of the analysis. It's clear that this thread wasn't written in good faith. The rest of his analysis is uninteresting and not worthy of much criticism, he's mostly correct, but a HS student could come up with this stuff.
      - Supermancho 7y ago
        It isnt possibly India. There is circumstantial evidence that it could be due to Chinese influence. The blanket interpretation ignoring context is not compelling. GL
        FDSGSG 7y ago
        > It isnt possibly India. It's just as much "possibly India" as it's "possibly China", there's literally zero evidence (circumstantial or not) suggesting that the post originated from either. > could be due to Chinese influence Completely different from the suggestion that the post was literally made in China. I'm sure absolutely nobody doubts that this post was made due to Chinese influence, it is the claim that the post physically originated from China which I find fundamentally ridiculous.
joshstrange 7y ago
> Either Mark Kern is misleading on purpose or he's a complete moron. Out of 33 tweets he makes a single mistake/overreach and you want to brand the whole thing as a "ridiculous conspiracy theory"? That seems to be a rather hasty generalization based on the 2nd of 33 tweets...
- FDSGSG 7y ago
  Mark Kern is a gamergater primarily known for his really bad takes, this is not a hasty generalization. >brand the whole thing as a "ridiculous conspiracy theory"? Oh no, I just stopped reading after I reached the ridiculous conspiracy theory. My comment is regarding the part I quoted.
- root_axis 7y ago
  I think it's fair to disregard the analysis at that point since the author demonstrates they cannot necessarily be trusted to interpret the facts.
UserIsUnused 7y ago
Do yourself a favor and finish reading the chain
- FDSGSG 7y ago
  I have now done that, my opinion remains unchanged.
  - UserIsUnused 7y ago
    Thanks.