4 ms·

Again, that is not the same as claiming the mayor or any participants are pedophiles. As far as children being present, see my comment elsewhere: https://news.

Again, that is not the same as claiming the mayor or any participants are pedophiles. As far as children being present, see my comment elsewhere: https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=39293774 https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=39293774

jrflowers 3y ago
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lgbtq-book-bans-librarian-viral-video_n_6495bad2e4b02f808ab57ee0 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lgbtq-book-bans-librarian-vir... These examples are not hard to find
- richbell 3y ago
  > These examples are not hard to find Is there a copy of the inciting video available somewhere? The article didn't seem to include it. That does seem damning, if true to how the article described it.
  - dekhn 3y ago
    Stop being obtuse (pretending to be naive) and just do your own research.
    - richbell 3y ago
      > Stop being obtuse (pretending to be naive) and just do your own research. I have, and what I've found does not support the claims that people are making. Granted, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok are quite difficult to browse without an account/app, so I acknowledge it's possible that things exist I haven't been able to find. I find it bizarre how aggressive people are getting in response to me asking for concrete examples.
      - jrflowers 3y ago
        > Granted, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok are quite difficult to browse without an account/app, so I acknowledge it's possible that things exist I haven't been able to find. What have you found without accounts on these platforms and how are you confident in what you’ve concluded given that limitation?
    - jrflowers 3y ago
      You’re responding to a type of comedy bit. Rich doesn’t want to post “I think the complaints about libsoftiktok are made up” because explaining why that is isn’t as entertaining as simply making disagreeing with that position as tedious as possible. Rather than trying to convince other people of this position, it is more fun to flat out refuse to do any research at all — and then move the goalposts once somebody falls for the bait. For example, I actually answered Rich’s last question but didn’t get a reply because it didn’t fit into the bit.
      - dekhn 3y ago
        Well, I was trying to figure out which category he fit into: sealioning, trolling, intensionally obtuse, emotionless pedant, naive internet sleuth, lazy internet sleuth, and even "completely serious fact-finder with no agenda". I think your "comedy" falls under "trolling" but I'd also be prepared for him being a completely serious fact-finder who truly believes that people are just lying. I've kind of lost interest because he's not contributing anything to the discussion.
        jrflowers 3y ago
        I’ve never heard the term sealioning, that’s super useful! Yeah I would file this bit under that umbrella, as serious fact-finders would (in this case) do a 10 second search themselves, whereas “prove libsoftiktok is malignant here on this page, the comments section of a hacker news post” isn’t a hallmark of good faith engagement.
      - richbell 3y ago
        > For example, I actually answered Rich’s last question but didn’t get a reply because it didn’t fit into the bit. You didn't get a reply because I haven't been on the site. You also didn't answer my question. You posted a blog post alleging that specific claims had been made. I acknowledged that the allegations seemed serious and asked if the video in question was available to be viewed, to which you simply responded "no." Saying "you can easily find examples" is disingenuous when many of the examples are making or repeating claims that are either unsourced or with dubious evidence. For example, the linked article seems to omit context that took me "10 seconds" to find.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - jrflowers 3y ago
    No

jrflowers 3y ago

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lgbtq-book-bans-librarian-viral-video_n_6495bad2e4b02f808ab57ee0 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lgbtq-book-bans-librarian-vir... These examples are not hard to find

richbell 3y ago
> These examples are not hard to find Is there a copy of the inciting video available somewhere? The article didn't seem to include it. That does seem damning, if true to how the article described it.
- dekhn 3y ago
  Stop being obtuse (pretending to be naive) and just do your own research.
  - richbell 3y ago
    > Stop being obtuse (pretending to be naive) and just do your own research. I have, and what I've found does not support the claims that people are making. Granted, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok are quite difficult to browse without an account/app, so I acknowledge it's possible that things exist I haven't been able to find. I find it bizarre how aggressive people are getting in response to me asking for concrete examples.
    - jrflowers 3y ago
      > Granted, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok are quite difficult to browse without an account/app, so I acknowledge it's possible that things exist I haven't been able to find. What have you found without accounts on these platforms and how are you confident in what you’ve concluded given that limitation?
  - jrflowers 3y ago
    You’re responding to a type of comedy bit. Rich doesn’t want to post “I think the complaints about libsoftiktok are made up” because explaining why that is isn’t as entertaining as simply making disagreeing with that position as tedious as possible. Rather than trying to convince other people of this position, it is more fun to flat out refuse to do any research at all — and then move the goalposts once somebody falls for the bait. For example, I actually answered Rich’s last question but didn’t get a reply because it didn’t fit into the bit.
    - dekhn 3y ago
      Well, I was trying to figure out which category he fit into: sealioning, trolling, intensionally obtuse, emotionless pedant, naive internet sleuth, lazy internet sleuth, and even "completely serious fact-finder with no agenda". I think your "comedy" falls under "trolling" but I'd also be prepared for him being a completely serious fact-finder who truly believes that people are just lying. I've kind of lost interest because he's not contributing anything to the discussion.
      - jrflowers 3y ago
        I’ve never heard the term sealioning, that’s super useful! Yeah I would file this bit under that umbrella, as serious fact-finders would (in this case) do a 10 second search themselves, whereas “prove libsoftiktok is malignant here on this page, the comments section of a hacker news post” isn’t a hallmark of good faith engagement.
    - richbell 3y ago
      > For example, I actually answered Rich’s last question but didn’t get a reply because it didn’t fit into the bit. You didn't get a reply because I haven't been on the site. You also didn't answer my question. You posted a blog post alleging that specific claims had been made. I acknowledged that the allegations seemed serious and asked if the video in question was available to be viewed, to which you simply responded "no." Saying "you can easily find examples" is disingenuous when many of the examples are making or repeating claims that are either unsourced or with dubious evidence. For example, the linked article seems to omit context that took me "10 seconds" to find.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- jrflowers 3y ago
  No