3 ms·
This thread is replete with ad hominems, mind reading, and speculation ("admit it, Musk's bid for Twitter was to unmuzzle Trump". No proof offered though). I'm
by Splatter 4y ago
This thread is replete with ad hominems, mind reading, and speculation ("admit it, Musk's bid for Twitter was to unmuzzle Trump". No proof offered though).
I'm okay with Musk. If you're not, fine. Why the need to constantly assert evil intentions by those you disagree with? It's gets tiring.
- sdoering 4y agoI actually have no opinion on Musk. I just don't care enough to form an opinion. I just stated that I would have wished for a fact based discussion. I don't know if what the author of the piece stated was true, based in fact, exaggerated or what not. But there were a lot of factual claims to be potentially attacked. Yet OP choose to go the ad hominem route. My problem is, that this doesn't help me as uninformed outside reader in evaluating the claims of the original piece. Not sure if this is what OP intended, but probably not. But not engaging on a factual level strengthens the original arguments for the external observer. It is a signal to the ingroup on the cost of loosing credibility with the outgroup. Edit: Typo