mods having a special meeting to decide how to deal with you is not really a glowing endorsement.
aubeynarf
joined 11 months ago
The statement “He has no chance of winning” is demonstrably false, it is not a matter of opinion. arguably, the statement about third parties is demonstrably false as well
when Trump won the presidency, one of his first actions was to block immigration specifically from Muslim countries. He has also stated that Israel needs to “finish the job” in Palestine.
Third parties, with no chance of winning or affecting policy, splitting support for Harris or creating doubt and apathy leading to even 1 percentage point of lower turnout among non-Trump voters would be pushing the US toward a more certain Trump win - an outcome that is surely worse for Palestinians.
This is false.
no dude, you don’t get it, it was just an article that was posted on a larger site and so now it’s posted here somehow with 90 similar ones. He has no motivation or agenda or opinion at all really! Can’t we just discuss the articles?
He really doesn’t understand that tariffs are not paid by the exporting country.
you don’t believe you have an agenda of increasing support for third parties to “fight against the two-party duopoly”?
What about these articles makes them interesting to you?
You may need to go back to when he showed up here, when people responded to the concept of third party candidates in general, not him or their assumptions about him specifically.
After a while he made a name for himself, and people started to respond to him differently after evaluating his many interactions.
Let’s compare, for example, to mozz, who probably has a fair amount of respect for his thoughtful and comprehensive replies. Or jeffw, who also seems to want to generate traffic but appears to be much more genuine about republishing political articles of general interest.
UniversalMonk has earned some of the negative response he’s getting.
LOL, dude, let me tell you this approach is very transparent and doesn’t make you look clever.
Everyone knows you have editorial agency and has observed that you have a very narrow filter for what you do choose to post. You have taken action to become a high-volume poster in a small community. It’s obvious what your motivations are supposed to be on a surface level, and people are assuming what they are on a deeper/hidden level. Being unwilling to own up to at least the surface level, and saying that you just see random things and republish them, strengthens the assumption of the hidden motive.
I will be transparent: growing support for the candidates you are taking intentful action to specifically promote will result in an outcome counter to my goals and the goals of many people “left of center”, even far left of center. I believe they are counter to the goals of the “shallow level you” as well. You have certainly heard this many times. So it strengthens the idea that the “hidden you” is the real one.
Retreating to feigned ignorance or obtuseness doesn’t make the case regarding your motives - it weakens it.
If you really don’t “get” why your activity has led to comparisons with bad-faith actors who seek to split support for the political left-of-center in the US, then just take it as a given - the response from the community, who has come to know you, should be proof of the probability of that comparison.
At the same time, when people (such as me) respond to the basis of the article or the political effect of support for the candidates you select to promote, you go on a tangent about “censorship” or a meta-discussion about forum rules, often with a boilerplate response. This also makes you look bad.
I generally don’t assume people are stupid, and when I assume that you aren’t stupid either, it is easy to start wondering about the seemingly intentionally obtuse behavior.
As I have, I will continue to push back against support for spoiler candidates. That’s a fair use for this forum - if you go off putting words in my mouth, I will call you out for the bad-faith argument - also a fair use of this forum.
The other participants here are not stupid either - I would personally stop behaving as though they are.
you are not posting 99.99% of all the possible political news articles. Why did you choose this one, Or the other ones that you do post ?
You really don’t think it’s your personal vote that is the issue here?
If you have decided how you will vote, and it is a personal matter only, why have you posted 75+ articles making noise about fringe party candidates’ ballot access?