3 ms·

> We do not know the motivation of the shooter, but charlie had violent enemies who claimed he wasn't fascist enough Who said he wasn't fascist enough?

by HKH2 1y ago

ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
One example of a whole organization of such people who had a long-running feud with charlie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers#Groyper_War_(2019) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers#Groyper_War_(2019) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers#Groyper_War_2_(2024) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers#Groyper_War_2_(2024)
- HKH2 1y ago
  As far as I can see, there's nothing there mentioning people accusing others of being 'not fascist enough'. Also, you said 'violent enemies', but I can't see that mentioned either.
  - ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
    Interesting! I and many others have read the exact same sections and come to the opposite conclusion: that the sections do indeed describe multiple feuds with a violent group that felt that Charlie wasn't fascist enough Just in case everybody except you is mistaken, I asked an impartial LLM, who confirmed the matter: https://chatgpt.com/share/68c8802c-7b64-800a-8452-bd18992088cf https://chatgpt.com/share/68c8802c-7b64-800a-8452-bd18992088... (Obviously they don't use those exact terms, so I hope you're not hung up on a lack of a quote saying verbatim "we are fascist and you aren't fascist enough" or "we hereby announce that we are violent", please let me know if you are fixated upon this) Like I said, we shouldn't speculate on motive, because we can see there is at least as much there as anywhere else. Anyhow, why do you think your conclusion is so opposite others'?
    - HKH2 1y ago
      "violent enemies" implies they were willing to do violence against him. Where's the evidence of that?
      - ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
        "violent enemy" means any person (in this case, any organization) which both: 1. is an enemy, and 2. is violent (has ever been shown to have attitudes, inclinations, tendencies, or propensity towards violence [towards anyone or anything])

> We do not know the motivation of the shooter, but charlie had violent enemies who claimed he wasn't fascist enough Who said he wasn't fascist enough?

by HKH2 1y ago

> We do not know the motivation of the shooter, but charlie had violent enemies who claimed he wasn't fascist enough Who said he wasn't fascist enough?

ImPostingOnHN 1y ago

One example of a whole organization of such people who had a long-running feud with charlie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers#Groyper_War_(2019) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers#Groyper_War_(2019) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers#Groyper_War_2_(2024) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers#Groyper_War_2_(2024)

HKH2 1y ago
As far as I can see, there's nothing there mentioning people accusing others of being 'not fascist enough'. Also, you said 'violent enemies', but I can't see that mentioned either.
- ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
  Interesting! I and many others have read the exact same sections and come to the opposite conclusion: that the sections do indeed describe multiple feuds with a violent group that felt that Charlie wasn't fascist enough Just in case everybody except you is mistaken, I asked an impartial LLM, who confirmed the matter: https://chatgpt.com/share/68c8802c-7b64-800a-8452-bd18992088cf https://chatgpt.com/share/68c8802c-7b64-800a-8452-bd18992088... (Obviously they don't use those exact terms, so I hope you're not hung up on a lack of a quote saying verbatim "we are fascist and you aren't fascist enough" or "we hereby announce that we are violent", please let me know if you are fixated upon this) Like I said, we shouldn't speculate on motive, because we can see there is at least as much there as anywhere else. Anyhow, why do you think your conclusion is so opposite others'?
  - HKH2 1y ago
    "violent enemies" implies they were willing to do violence against him. Where's the evidence of that?
    - ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
      "violent enemy" means any person (in this case, any organization) which both: 1. is an enemy, and 2. is violent (has ever been shown to have attitudes, inclinations, tendencies, or propensity towards violence [towards anyone or anything])