Not just any bot spam - the most downvoted spam in Lemmy history. It is now more unpopular than the most popular Lemmy account is popular.
I wish you wouldn't try to derail the conversation.
Merely being better than Trump was 4 years ago is not going to stop climate change. This criticism of Biden and Harris needs to be amplified, not sidetracked.
We will take immediate action to reverse the Trump Administration’s dangerous and destructive rollbacks of critical climate and environmental protections. We will rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement
Biden rejoined the Paris Agreement in early 2021. Have they not updated their climate platform in 3 years?
Wow, you're really reaching there. I'm asking you to stop blaming women for men's problems. There's a group of people who aren't doing that, and if you don't want to be called a misogynist, follow the example of that group.
I think you misunderstood me. I do think men should have an analogous space. I support !mensliberation@lemmy.ca 100%.
If you didn't misunderstand me, men don't need a space specifically for comparing their issues negatively against women's issues. That space is everywhere and anywhere, as evidenced by this discussion occurring in !asklemmy@lemmy.world and collecting overwhelmingly positive upvotes.
We had to shutter !twoxchromosomes@slrpnk.net because of persistent and vocal judgement by a large population of Lemmy users, many from Lemmy.World. So no, talking about issues specific to their gender is definitely not a double standard where men get the short end of the stick.
This is why you get judged. Because you so nakedly put on display how much ignorance and little empathy you have for women's issues.
!mensliberation@lemmy.ca exists specifically for men who understand their issues in society are intersectional with women's issues, and that solving them requires uniting to end patriarchy. Any discussion outside of that framing deserves the assumption that it's a misogynist men's pity party.
This is not a case of copy/pasting the same comment in multiple threads. Please look closer at the comments and the reports. One comment is repeated once, but that is due to it being topical to MBFC's take on the BBC, and both articles were from the BBC.
Also, I'm alarmed you consider contextualization of MBFC in comments that reply to the Bot as 'off-topic.' The Bot created the topic of MBFC's credibility by linking to it as an authoritative source. If a comment about the credibility of the BBC in reply to an article published by the BBC is on-topic, then a comment about the credibility of MBFC as a reply to a review published by MBFC is also on-topic.
I appreciate you reading and responding to my concern instead of censoring me like your fellow mod in !news and !world:
- Censored by !news as 'Stop Spamming'
- Censored by !news as 'Stop Spamming'
- Censored by !world as 'Stop Spamming'
- Censored by !news as 'Stop Spamming'
- Censored by !world as 'Stop Spamming'
- Censored by !news as 'Stop Spamming'
- Censored by !world as 'Stop Spamming'
- Censored by !news as 'Stop Spamming'
More than half of these occurred in a community you moderate. Do you approve of this use of the term 'spamming' to silence criticism?
Exposing a free API for anyone to use is not typical trade practice for respectable fact-checking operations. You may be able to get free access as a non-profit organization, and that may be worth persuing. On the other hand, there's a fundamental problem in the disconnect between the goals of real fact-checking websites and the kind of bot you are trying to create.
Hey everybody! The concept of human rights is a left-wing concept, but science that doesn't apply to human rights is apolitical.
That's right, according to Dave M. Van Zandt, the political spectrum of left and right means stuff American Democrats care about vs stuff American Republicans care about. He's placed organizations like HRW, that lobbies for the human rights of people tortured and imprisoned by authoritarian regimes as 'center-left', and HRC, a non-partisan group that lobbies for the human rights of LGBTQ people as 'left'.
Meanwhile, organizations like NOAA which Republicans want to defund due to their well documented war on science, Dave M. Van Zandt does not place on the political spectrum. The impartiality of science is only important when it doesn't apply to the scientific consensus that LGBTQ people are human and that all humans should have rights.