3 ms·

I meant reddit style comment* previously > Add this to the list > Thats the point of ranking based on a certain criteria. Why would someone refute you with lo

I meant reddit style comment* previously > Add this to the list > Thats the point of ranking based on a certain criteria. Why would someone refute you with logic and facts if you present none > Yeah, statements are generally true or false.. > see point two > Baiting people to respond to you isn't constructive discourse, see point two > Still unsure how you arrived that your opinion is true? Where is the support? Past the fact that your posts are a prime example of a low-quality shit-tier discussion, that's pretty clear. I guess your resistance to supporting facts might be proof of an increase in laziness too, and you expect more from the other party to carry it

Jerrrry 5y ago
I do, because I start the discussion, and make a remark that nobody wants do partake in any valid discussion that isn't perfectly aligned with current consensus, identify the means that people use to dismiss it (minimizing threads and the stupid fucking contrast shift of the text/background, ((@dang, that is unacceptable, figure something else out))) and proceed to have my point demonstrated repeatedly by people willfully only engaging in ad hominem at best. had I not remarked that, nobody would be bother enough to even engage in ad hominem. try it. I guess the people interested in (useful) discourse and the people actually knowledgeable enough to provide it have drifted so far that it is now not-apparent on any common, non-niche, generic news aggregation sites. Whether this is just due to the encroaching political polarization of all aspects of life, or due to the new duality of the modern psyche, would be a takeaway for the reader. everyone posting on the internet is crazy. lurkers decide which extreme gets shown, due to populist algorithms. and i am yelling into the fucking void, because some lazy twats disagreed with me - not contributing usefully to discussion, and collapsed the comment chain.

Jerrrry 5y ago

I do, because I start the discussion, and make a remark that nobody wants do partake in any valid discussion that isn't perfectly aligned with current consensus, identify the means that people use to dismiss it (minimizing threads and the stupid fucking contrast shift of the text/background, ((@dang, that is unacceptable, figure something else out))) and proceed to have my point demonstrated repeatedly by people willfully only engaging in ad hominem at best. had I not remarked that, nobody would be bother enough to even engage in ad hominem. try it. I guess the people interested in (useful) discourse and the people actually knowledgeable enough to provide it have drifted so far that it is now not-apparent on any common, non-niche, generic news aggregation sites. Whether this is just due to the encroaching political polarization of all aspects of life, or due to the new duality of the modern psyche, would be a takeaway for the reader. everyone posting on the internet is crazy. lurkers decide which extreme gets shown, due to populist algorithms. and i am yelling into the fucking void, because some lazy twats disagreed with me - not contributing usefully to discussion, and collapsed the comment chain.