3 ms·

> Paul Keating was the prime minister of Australia from 1991 to 1996. Looks like he's trying for Prime Minister of China next.

graderjs 5y ago
Yeah because that's the only possible interpretation of someone who's not fervently critical of china. Since it's "impossible" that they could be right in their advocacy for consideration of a Chinese perspective or their criticism of Western policy regarding China...the only possible alternative is that. Seems like an eminently helpful attitude conducive to solid policy positions for Australia going forward. Well done! maybe you should be angling for prime minister of Australia the way you're going... Better yet go for defense minister then you can make savvy smart clever and incisive comments like well "Keating is just Grand Appeaser comrade keating." Well played, Dutton! that really eviscerated all of Keating's points.
- outsomnia 5y ago
  > Better yet go for defense minister then you can make savvy smart clever and incisive comments like well "Keating is just Grand Appeaser comrade keating." Well played, Dutton! that really eviscerated all of Keating's points. ...erm... do you really need me for this? You seem to be making stuff up to reply to and replying to it all by yourself, like some GPT-3 gone wild.
  - graderjs 5y ago
    Oh that's not very nice. Why is the new internet insult the be dehumanizing someone by comparing them to GPT-3? I guess it's a way to go, "I'm not gonna address your point, I'm just gonna attack you, and then pretend well your points can't make sense because it was clearly written by an AI." Is that the best you can do? I guess maybe you don't know that Dutton actually called Keating that. But I also get your point, I am saying a lot of stuff there, and then replying to it. But that's what it is for me. When you say that stuff, that's what I'm thinking. I mean, is that really any different to you...? When I said this, you thought "Prime minister of China", and "made that up" and said it. I mean, so what's the difference? Conversation is all about "making up" things to say, right? Or maybe it's like pretending my "making up" is not as good as your "making up" as another way to look down on me? Pretending what I said is somehow less valid, than what you said? It's just not very nice. I mean...why would you need to believe that? I mean, we can just have different views..and say different things...you don't have to sort of dehumanize me and look down on me or what I'm saying, right? Like, anyone who disagrees with you, or doesn't think the same as you, deserves that? Or is bad? I mean, why can't you just make another point, rather than trying to attack someone. Like...why? What is there for you about that, I wonder. And why do these type of comments, these type of attacking comments, always come from anonymous accounts. Like people just want cover...to be abusive like that...really? sigh

graderjs 5y ago

Yeah because that's the only possible interpretation of someone who's not fervently critical of china. Since it's "impossible" that they could be right in their advocacy for consideration of a Chinese perspective or their criticism of Western policy regarding China...the only possible alternative is that. Seems like an eminently helpful attitude conducive to solid policy positions for Australia going forward. Well done! maybe you should be angling for prime minister of Australia the way you're going... Better yet go for defense minister then you can make savvy smart clever and incisive comments like well "Keating is just Grand Appeaser comrade keating." Well played, Dutton! that really eviscerated all of Keating's points.

outsomnia 5y ago
> Better yet go for defense minister then you can make savvy smart clever and incisive comments like well "Keating is just Grand Appeaser comrade keating." Well played, Dutton! that really eviscerated all of Keating's points. ...erm... do you really need me for this? You seem to be making stuff up to reply to and replying to it all by yourself, like some GPT-3 gone wild.
- graderjs 5y ago
  Oh that's not very nice. Why is the new internet insult the be dehumanizing someone by comparing them to GPT-3? I guess it's a way to go, "I'm not gonna address your point, I'm just gonna attack you, and then pretend well your points can't make sense because it was clearly written by an AI." Is that the best you can do? I guess maybe you don't know that Dutton actually called Keating that. But I also get your point, I am saying a lot of stuff there, and then replying to it. But that's what it is for me. When you say that stuff, that's what I'm thinking. I mean, is that really any different to you...? When I said this, you thought "Prime minister of China", and "made that up" and said it. I mean, so what's the difference? Conversation is all about "making up" things to say, right? Or maybe it's like pretending my "making up" is not as good as your "making up" as another way to look down on me? Pretending what I said is somehow less valid, than what you said? It's just not very nice. I mean...why would you need to believe that? I mean, we can just have different views..and say different things...you don't have to sort of dehumanize me and look down on me or what I'm saying, right? Like, anyone who disagrees with you, or doesn't think the same as you, deserves that? Or is bad? I mean, why can't you just make another point, rather than trying to attack someone. Like...why? What is there for you about that, I wonder. And why do these type of comments, these type of attacking comments, always come from anonymous accounts. Like people just want cover...to be abusive like that...really? sigh