The Chat:
For real, focus on the road.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
TC is highly invested in being an online intellectual. He doesn't like when others point out his understandings of things are pretty surface. Sorry TC. :(
I can appreciate that Alena is actually trying to engage in an actual discussion, it's a shame you can't.
Ah bububp, so was MissC but you decided to be dismissive and rude first.
Again, what's your point? Can someone not be rude and otherwise make a point?
you aren't making any points at that time you were simply trying to shame her for not knowing " the script" that you were referring to she's not a mind reader
I wasn't referring to a specific script and have already since made that known, why are you carrying on like Misscomm needs this much assistance?
That claim has already played out in a past thread. Why are you like this?
TC is highly invested in being an online intellectual. He doesn't like when others point out his understandings of things are pretty surface. Sorry TC. :(
I can appreciate that Alena is actually trying to engage in an actual discussion, it's a shame you can't.
Ah bububp, so was MissC but you decided to be dismissive and rude first.
Again, what's your point? Can someone not be rude and otherwise make a point?
you aren't making any points at that time you were simply trying to shame her for not knowing " the script" that you were referring to she's not a mind reader
I wasn't referring to a specific script and have already since made that known, why are you carrying on like Misscomm needs this much assistance?
That claim has already played out in a past thread. Why are you like this?
Considering I already elaborated enough as of the end of page one, and you replied to it, I don't understand who else these baby steps are meant to benefit.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
Because Putin is challenging him over something very specific
So we're just going to ignore that this is the second time Putin's tried to draw attention towards our leaders in the form of live content to get around our censor in favor of his own agenda?
It was genius when he made Trump deal with that shit, even undermining it further with not allowing Trump's own people to witness their talks. It's both an effective flex and a means of undermining our propaganda.it seems you're putting words in my mouth as I've never said that we should ignore his constant need to display cracks in our own propaganda.
His need to display cracks in our own propaganda was my point, and if that notion needs defending, that can be done through watching how other Russian activities have been affecting the US web-space when it comes to political nudging.
At the same time we should acknowledge that he's not exactly the cleanest character that should be praised for doing this. Our propaganda should be questioned yes, but it should also matter to us who it is questioning it.
Putin is challenging Biden over agreeing to a leading question asked of him. While I mostly agree with what Putin wants to do and what he said in regards to this I asked you if you knew what the script was.
When it became about that, it stopped being about Putin as it's own tangent.
If you want me to talk about what I believe that's fine, but it'll serve to tangent away from what was otherwise meant. My beliefs though are pretty debatable for accuracy, so I'd be saying them more as general theory.
That should still be a nice read even if to ask why or how you were led to believe such things.
This debate will never happen it will be framed as another bit of trying to meddle with American heads.
I wish it would, it has the potential for The Left to flex back if it's handled right.
Putin whether he accepts or not will get something out of it, making posing this in the first place a smart move. As the one who proposed it it also makes him seem that much 'braver' or whatever.
The political left isn't going to do anything about it, they'll want to push a front of unity along side those that call this push as an attack to divide, it would look bad for those pushing more progressive ideas to side or flex this at all. It all comes down to look that can be used against them in the future.
Our propaganda against anything Russia has been so ingrained that it would be too easy to use this against those that side for it.
you're intentionally being vague about the specific script and it's coming across as if you don't know and want to appear as if you do while attempting to shame someone else.
I never said it was a specific script, just that it'd take a foreign leader to challenge said script.
It bothers me that you would accuse her of not being able to engage with you in a discussion when it was you trying to not honestly engage with her through snark
Her last points made were pretty much just character snipes, which signals to me that she's given up.
Your initial response was a snipe that started it in the first place.
it's not unheard of that someone that doesn't live in our country doesn't know specifically what script is being challenged you could have just answered.
MissComm talks more often about US politics than her own, but I can understand why you'd try to go with the angle of "She wouldn't get it".
You're once again putting words in my mouth
This time as a joke, clearly you wouldn't say Misscomm's lacking in mental faculties to her face, and now that I've said this you're liable to feel challenged to prove that she's smart to save face. 😛
You're quite gross in this need to try to sow in doubt even if you label it as joking, you do this a lot and it's very annoying.
you made the claim that Putin would be challenging the government fed script she asked you what script was that and you were unable to answer and said you decided on snark.
I've otherwise answered the question, the specific script is irrelevant. The existence of scripting and it's room to be challenged by Putin in this format was my only original point being made.
You answered it after you were asked by someone else,
I don't like arguing I'm not politically savvy so my route was to go the softest way possible in order to make you understand that you're coming off at the dick instead of just answering the question
I answered the question though, and those are two independent variables. It's not as if rude people are suddenly not answering questions, that's more of a fault on the listener for not picking them up when they caught some feels.
But you didn't answer the question when it was a certain person asking, you instead used snark in an attempt to shame. Hers was a valid question, you answered me with more seriousness than you'd given her. Truly the only one that had any feels was the one snarking.
that you try to snark at someone and then when you get snarked back you decide to accuse them of not being able to engage in a conversationSnark can still be a vehicle for content, while her own posting has descended into raw ad hominem, rather than simply flavoring the discussion with it to make it spicier.
It's never you, is it.
Just in: the emaciated tranny mutant is also a conspiracy theorist
Is it really being a conspiracy theorist to question what the government tells you?
Just in: the emaciated tranny mutant is also a conspiracy theorist
What do you mean 'Just In', I've been saying this.
What makes me uncomfortable's seeing channels like Vice prove things I've been afraid of, if not my doing research to try to calm down achieving the opposite (again, like my views on the F.D.A.).
Just in: the emaciated tranny mutant is also a conspiracy theorist
Is it really being a conspiracy theorist to question what the government tells you?
Yes actually.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
last edit on
3/19/2021 5:27:26 PM
Just in: the emaciated tranny mutant is also a conspiracy theorist
What do you mean 'Just In', I've been saying this.
What makes me uncomfortable's seeing channels like Vice prove things I've been afraid of, if not my doing research to try to calm down achieving the opposite (again, like my views on the F.D.A.).Just in: the emaciated tranny mutant is also a conspiracy theorist
Is it really being a conspiracy theorist to question what the government tells you?
Yes actually.
Nah there's levels of it. You can question things without being a conspiracy theorist, it's when you start saying the reason that 9/11 was an inside job was cos the Lizard overlords needed a lot of dead bodies for a satanic ritual, sigils etched into the pillars of the world trade center towers
Because Putin is challenging him over something very specific
So we're just going to ignore that this is the second time Putin's tried to draw attention towards our leaders in the form of live content to get around our censor in favor of his own agenda?
It was genius when he made Trump deal with that shit, even undermining it further with not allowing Trump's own people to witness their talks. It's both an effective flex and a means of undermining our propaganda.it seems you're putting words in my mouth as I've never said that we should ignore his constant need to display cracks in our own propaganda.
His need to display cracks in our own propaganda was my point, and if that notion needs defending, that can be done through watching how other Russian activities have been affecting the US web-space when it comes to political nudging.
At the same time we should acknowledge that he's not exactly the cleanest character that should be praised for doing this. Our propaganda should be questioned yes, but it should also matter to us who it is questioning it.
I never said he was clean, but odds are that we won't have a clean person creating circumstances like this over how someone diabolical'd be the sort of mind to come up with these kinds of strategies.
Putin's doing it as an effective flex, and from him doing it it can carry damages even outside of how it could dismantle the propaganda that otherwise protects the American people from themselves (while furthering the civil war infighting), but from the perspective of a detached historian/sociologist/political theorist/etc it can still be appreciated for it's genius.
Putin is challenging Biden over agreeing to a leading question asked of him. While I mostly agree with what Putin wants to do and what he said in regards to this I asked you if you knew what the script was.
When it became about that, it stopped being about Putin as it's own tangent.
If you want me to talk about what I believe that's fine, but it'll serve to tangent away from what was otherwise meant. My beliefs though are pretty debatable for accuracy, so I'd be saying them more as general theory.That should still be a nice read even if to ask why or how you were led to believe such things.
Sure, either if these tensions die down or if a new topic's made.
This debate will never happen it will be framed as another bit of trying to meddle with American heads.
I wish it would, it has the potential for The Left to flex back if it's handled right.
Putin whether he accepts or not will get something out of it, making posing this in the first place a smart move. As the one who proposed it it also makes him seem that much 'braver' or whatever.The political left isn't going to do anything about it, they'll want to push a front of unity along side those that call this push as an attack to divide, it would look bad for those pushing more progressive ideas to side or flex this at all. It all comes down to look that can be used against them in the future.
By not accepting it, it gives The Right reason to think "Trump was brave", something in relation to what even Trump believes he was doing both there and North Korea; Being their 'friend' to protect us from how scary and powerful they are. Trump played the role of the shook diplomat in both cases, and interviews with him make it super transparent.
By not accepting the debate they further the divide by making one side look weaker than the other and by giving Putin more room to flex, while if this were handled with something closer to Obama's level of charm this could end up working to empower their global perception. As is, Putin first took advantage of a nut-brained narc who couldn't say no, and now is trying to do the same with a doddering old dude who'd be weakening his position regardless of if he says yes or no.
Our propaganda against anything Russia has been so ingrained that it would be too easy to use this against those that side for it.
I feel like it'd play out as Leftist weakness either way, so why not go for the showier one if there's nothing to hide?
The Right's eating up that this entire thing is scripted, even a lot of them over Trump, even some over Fox News being CNN 2.0. Having Biden talk, live in another country's space, would sell that much more to us that it's not just a US government farce, a stage play for the commoners, as could be further construed from when our government freaked the fuck out over Trump talking to Putin privately.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
you're intentionally being vague about the specific script and it's coming across as if you don't know and want to appear as if you do while attempting to shame someone else.
I never said it was a specific script, just that it'd take a foreign leader to challenge said script.
It bothers me that you would accuse her of not being able to engage with you in a discussion when it was you trying to not honestly engage with her through snark
Her last points made were pretty much just character snipes, which signals to me that she's given up.
Your initial response was a snipe that started it in the first place.
What's your point? I've been making jabs and otherwise answering the points, while she's only doing jabs.
Therein lies the difference.
it's not unheard of that someone that doesn't live in our country doesn't know specifically what script is being challenged you could have just answered.
MissComm talks more often about US politics than her own, but I can understand why you'd try to go with the angle of "She wouldn't get it".
You're once again putting words in my mouth
This time as a joke, clearly you wouldn't say Misscomm's lacking in mental faculties to her face, and now that I've said this you're liable to feel challenged to prove that she's smart to save face. 😛
You're quite gross in this need to try to sow in doubt even if you label it as joking, you do this a lot and it's very annoying.
It's not really on me how seriously you choose to take jokes, I even threw an emoji in there to flag it as a jab.
When both you and I know that you aren't defending Misscomm over her lack of intelligence (solely), my insistence upon it makes it that much snarkier.
you made the claim that Putin would be challenging the government fed script she asked you what script was that and you were unable to answer and said you decided on snark.
I've otherwise answered the question, the specific script is irrelevant. The existence of scripting and it's room to be challenged by Putin in this format was my only original point being made.
You answered it after you were asked by someone else,
Then she proceeded to keep going on page two, yes, which led to further elaboration where she still chose to go with a strawman representation of my argument ala 'plebs'.
I don't like arguing I'm not politically savvy so my route was to go the softest way possible in order to make you understand that you're coming off at the dick instead of just answering the question
I answered the question though, and those are two independent variables. It's not as if rude people are suddenly not answering questions, that's more of a fault on the listener for not picking them up when they caught some feels.
But you didn't answer the question when it was a certain person asking, you instead used snark in an attempt to shame.
Actually, I was accomplishing both. You and her tried to shift the goalpost to being about 'specific scripts' in response to my making a general point, then she proceeded to get snippy when she didn't understand, then coped by filling in the blanks with presumptions like she always does.
At this point you're only continuing on purely to be contrarian, even she's left the conversation at this point.
Hers was a valid question, you answered me with more seriousness than you'd given her.
Her question was a tangent, and your question was an elaboration upon hers. She since my answering it then continued to try to shift goalposts before leaving while you actually stuck to your guns (for a while anyway).
As per usual, Misscomm retreats from debate from not having anything to really contribute to it. She instead tried to make it about her own ideas, and when I wouldn't play ball she got frustrated. By just going over all that's been said in this topic my stance has been made more than clear, followed by this semantic battle that feels as if it's only here for the sake of it (as well as potential causality risks for your sense of status quo).
Truly the only one that had any feels was the one snarking.
Only in your narrative over how it suits it, when we clearly can see Misscomm displaying otherwise.
It's as if you're stuck defending her over circumstances.
that you try to snark at someone and then when you get snarked back you decide to accuse them of not being able to engage in a conversationSnark can still be a vehicle for content, while her own posting has descended into raw ad hominem, rather than simply flavoring the discussion with it to make it spicier.
It's never you, is it.
Such a blatant ad hom that otherwise serves to tangent to unrelated areas, but it only works as far as you conveniently not remembering the times I've stood down after displaying like this.
You presume I will not give up as reason to not take the points seriously, and you always go there so that you don't have to change your own.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔