3 ms·
Whatever you may think of yourself, you have demonstrated severe political bias in this thread by outright dismissing articles without reading them based on the
by garmaine 5y ago
Whatever you may think of yourself, you have demonstrated severe political bias in this thread by outright dismissing articles without reading them based on the perceived politics of the hosting organization.
FWIW I didn’t know or care the source of the article I shared. I just literally picked the first result in google that covered the history of ACT UP and the FDA, after skimming to make sure it seemed accurate.
- jacquesm 5y ago> I just literally picked the first result in google that covered the history of ACT UP and the FDA, after skimming to make sure it seemed accurate. Ah, the good old 'argument by google search'. Yes, what could possibly go wrong with that. You are now arguing in bad faith, I hope you appreciate at least that much.
- garmaine 5y agoHow am I arguing in bad faith? I’m deeply familiar with the actions of the FDA during the AIDS crisis, having studied it in college, read books, watched documentaries, etc. But I can’t convey that info through a HN comment, so I sought out an internet article which I first skimmed to make sure it got the facts straight before linking to. Did I violate some convention of discourse on HN in doing so?
- toolz 5y agoYou're not arguing in bad faith. You're being gaslit by someone who has already devolved to name calling in this thread.
- jacquesm 5y agoCherry picking cases to prove that an entire institution should somehow be disbanded in spite of a mountain of evidence to the contrary is arguing in bad faith. That you disagree because you and the other commenter here agree on the basic premise that you both believe FDA is bad and should be disbanded doesn't change that.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]