3 ms·

Unfortunately, I saw a fair amount of users here gleefully sharing said person's twitter. Rather than address the issue with twitter or make a stronger argument

Unfortunately, I saw a fair amount of users here gleefully sharing said person's twitter. Rather than address the issue with twitter or make a stronger argument, they'd rather paint a target and start a witch hunt themselves. Of course, the irony of claiming that this fact check is censorship while they go out of their way to harass and censor an individual I hope isn't lost on anyone.

busymom0 6y ago
It's not just some random person. He's the "Head of Site Integrity" and “leads the teams responsible for developing and enforcing Twitter’s rules” This person has some of the most despicable tweets himself - not just about 50% of the population as well as transphobic tweets. It's like saying we can't link to Jack Dorsey's tweet.
- fzeroracer 6y ago
  We both know what's really going on here. You're an opportunistic liar taking this as an opportunity to try and win some partisan points, considering in all the posts you mentioned you failed to note said transphobic tweets were 7 years prior. You can cut out the bullshit. I won't be falling for it.
  - busymom0 6y ago
    Why are you resolving to ad hom attacks? I literally linked to every single tweet. Not all tweets are from 7 years ago. Few are from since 2016. And since when did people start caring about how old they tweets are? Conservatives and Libertarians never get that luxury. I also linked to 5 different sources which prove I am right and you are wrong. You haven't disproven any of my sources. Also I specifically linked to sources which are left leaning. I don't care about HN points. If I did, I wouldn't be posting comments which I know will get downvoted. I care about posting the truth. Until you can disprove my sources, I am correct.
    - fzeroracer 6y ago
      It's ironic that you're complaining about ad hominem attacks when your entire source list consists of one large ad hominem attack. You can take your hypocrisy and get out. If you can't handle it, maybe you shouldn't be making them in the first place.
      - busymom0 6y ago
        Where exactly was I making an ad-hom attack? Not worth debating with you.

busymom0 6y ago

It's not just some random person. He's the "Head of Site Integrity" and “leads the teams responsible for developing and enforcing Twitter’s rules” This person has some of the most despicable tweets himself - not just about 50% of the population as well as transphobic tweets. It's like saying we can't link to Jack Dorsey's tweet.

fzeroracer 6y ago
We both know what's really going on here. You're an opportunistic liar taking this as an opportunity to try and win some partisan points, considering in all the posts you mentioned you failed to note said transphobic tweets were 7 years prior. You can cut out the bullshit. I won't be falling for it.
- busymom0 6y ago
  Why are you resolving to ad hom attacks? I literally linked to every single tweet. Not all tweets are from 7 years ago. Few are from since 2016. And since when did people start caring about how old they tweets are? Conservatives and Libertarians never get that luxury. I also linked to 5 different sources which prove I am right and you are wrong. You haven't disproven any of my sources. Also I specifically linked to sources which are left leaning. I don't care about HN points. If I did, I wouldn't be posting comments which I know will get downvoted. I care about posting the truth. Until you can disprove my sources, I am correct.
  - fzeroracer 6y ago
    It's ironic that you're complaining about ad hominem attacks when your entire source list consists of one large ad hominem attack. You can take your hypocrisy and get out. If you can't handle it, maybe you shouldn't be making them in the first place.
    - busymom0 6y ago
      Where exactly was I making an ad-hom attack? Not worth debating with you.