The Libertarian candidate running for a Front Range Colorado congressional seat is dropping out and backing the Republican contender in a move that could bolster the GOP’s chances of flipping…
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.
The vast majority of what I post in Lemmy is to socialist communities, which is aligned with my interests and values.
And I’m fully within my rights to post what I want to this political news community. If you or anyone else doesn’t agree with the content I share, that’s totally fine; I respect your right to your opinion.
However, that doesn’t mean I’m going to change what I post simply because it’s not popular or aligned with your political goals. I post what I believe is interesting and worth discussing, regardless of whether it’s well-received by everyone.
As for motives, I’m simply sharing articles and political news that I find interesting. As I’ve noted several times. I also posted a disclaimer when I posted the article in an attempt to stave off some of the angrier posters.
If that conflicts with the goals of others here, that’s the nature of political discourse.
It’s not about being intentionally obtuse or acting in bad faith. I’m here to engage with the content and conversation just like anyone else, and I’m not going to shy away from expressing my views or sharing articles just because they don’t fit neatly into someone else’s political framework.
That’s what this forum is for—debate and diverse perspectives.
I will continue being myself and posting content that I find interesting and that fits the theme of this political news community. It’s not my role to prove anything to you. I’ve given my opinion. You can accept it or not.
If you feel the content is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that created the article. If you feel the articles I’ve posted don’t fit the spirit of this community, feel free to contact the mods.
I’m interested in third parties and what motivates them to challenge the duopoly, which is why I created and mod a community called “Third Party News.”
And for the record, in addition to posting Green and Socialist articles, which some believe take votes away from Democrats, I also post Libertarian articles, which many think take votes from Republicans.
To imply that I’m pro-Trump or pro-Republican is absurd, especially when I’ve created and modded a Socialist community, where I’ve posted over 300 comments.
And just so ya know: Socialists despise Trump even more than Democrats.
Do you really believe I’d fake-run an entire Socialist community, even posting my collection of fucking antique socialist campaign pins, all just to post third-party articles in c/politics and somehow plan a lead to a Trump victory?
The majority of Lemmy users are staunch Democrats, so there’s no way an article I post is suddenly going to turn them into third-party supporters. And let’s not forget, the articles I post are from news outlets with far wider reach than Lemmy. Why anyone thinks I’m on some grand mission to sway voters here, of all places, is beyond me.
I’m gonna be transparent with you. I think you are so fucking pissed that I am not voting for Harris, that you automatically default to “If it’s not Harris, then the dude is a Trumper.” Yeah, that’s what I think you think.
Check my post history; the vast majority of what I post is Socialist content.
Do you really believe I’d fake-run an entire Socialist community, even posting my collection of fucking antique socialist campaign pins, all just to post third-party articles in c/politics and somehow plan a lead to a Trump victory?
Many many people have done SOOOO much more than this for that exact reason. A lot of them would even bother to have an account more than 3 months before election day!
I already know your thoughts. In fact you’ve had a few comments removed. And you’ve been banned from the World News comm for your comments.
But as I’ve mentioned several times, I believe you and I should focus on discussing the content of the articles posted from here on out, in order to keep with the spirit of this community. I feel that you get too personal in your attacks. Thank you!
Literally everyone gets banned from .ml’s world news for mentioning anything even vaguely, remotely anti China or anti Russia. That’s not the epic own you think it is, worldnews and honestly most of .ml is a cesspool of bad faith moderation.
It’s just as epic as when the poster showed a screenshot of a ban from a community I’ve never posted to and didn’t even know existed until I saw the screenshot. I wasn’t even notified of the ban.
In the screenshot I shared, there’s actual proof he posted there, unlike his screenshot of my info. Plus, some of his comments to me in this community have been removed for lack of civility today, as the screenshot shows.
Why do you keep claiming that you need to have posted on or have heard of a fediverse instance to be banned from it? Does it somehow “not count” if the person who was appalled by your posts saw them from another instance? Do you have other arbitrary criteria? It’s a really weird defense.
You’re either pretending not to understand that federation exists, or you truly somehow invested a thousand hours into a platform you’re clueless about.
Looks like they saw a bunch of your posts, banned you from the instance for “toxicity” and that prevented anything new from you from federating to their instance. Not too difficult to fathom.
Yes they are public, and as looking at that proves, I have never even posted to that community.
And my posting history proves that as well.
Do you have any proof that I’ve posted to that community?
As I learned from some of the tech people in the tech sub, it was looked at and there are many people banned from that sub with no explanation. If you can find any posts that I have made to that community, be sure to update me!
In the meantime, I believe we should focus on discussing the content of the articles posted from here on out, in order to keep with the spirit of this community. Thank you!
As I learned from some of the tech people in the tech sub, it was looked at and
Do you mean the post that was removed for breaking rules? The one that attracted a lot of downvotes and a few people dunking on you for obviously being butthurt about something no one has, or owes, an explanation for?
there are many people banned from that sub with no explanation.
Two. It was two people. Lol
I have noticed that it really gets under your skin that you were banned from an entire instance for toxicity. Maybe you can do the research instead of demanding a stranger find out why an admin in the fediverse took the time to specifically ban you and then write “toxic” as the reason. I don’t get paid by you to do this research but maybe you can send me a few hundred USD to do so? In the meantime, if you don’t want to discuss it, I suggest you not bring the issue up again. Thank you!
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.
The vast majority of what I post in Lemmy is to socialist communities, which is aligned with my interests and values.
And I’m fully within my rights to post what I want to this political news community. If you or anyone else doesn’t agree with the content I share, that’s totally fine; I respect your right to your opinion.
However, that doesn’t mean I’m going to change what I post simply because it’s not popular or aligned with your political goals. I post what I believe is interesting and worth discussing, regardless of whether it’s well-received by everyone.
As for motives, I’m simply sharing articles and political news that I find interesting. As I’ve noted several times. I also posted a disclaimer when I posted the article in an attempt to stave off some of the angrier posters.
If that conflicts with the goals of others here, that’s the nature of political discourse.
It’s not about being intentionally obtuse or acting in bad faith. I’m here to engage with the content and conversation just like anyone else, and I’m not going to shy away from expressing my views or sharing articles just because they don’t fit neatly into someone else’s political framework.
That’s what this forum is for—debate and diverse perspectives.
I will continue being myself and posting content that I find interesting and that fits the theme of this political news community. It’s not my role to prove anything to you. I’ve given my opinion. You can accept it or not.
If you feel the content is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that created the article. If you feel the articles I’ve posted don’t fit the spirit of this community, feel free to contact the mods.
What about these articles makes them interesting to you?
I’m interested in third parties and what motivates them to challenge the duopoly, which is why I created and mod a community called “Third Party News.”
And for the record, in addition to posting Green and Socialist articles, which some believe take votes away from Democrats, I also post Libertarian articles, which many think take votes from Republicans.
To imply that I’m pro-Trump or pro-Republican is absurd, especially when I’ve created and modded a Socialist community, where I’ve posted over 300 comments.
And just so ya know: Socialists despise Trump even more than Democrats.
Do you really believe I’d fake-run an entire Socialist community, even posting my collection of fucking antique socialist campaign pins, all just to post third-party articles in c/politics and somehow plan a lead to a Trump victory?
The majority of Lemmy users are staunch Democrats, so there’s no way an article I post is suddenly going to turn them into third-party supporters. And let’s not forget, the articles I post are from news outlets with far wider reach than Lemmy. Why anyone thinks I’m on some grand mission to sway voters here, of all places, is beyond me.
I’m gonna be transparent with you. I think you are so fucking pissed that I am not voting for Harris, that you automatically default to “If it’s not Harris, then the dude is a Trumper.” Yeah, that’s what I think you think.
Check my post history; the vast majority of what I post is Socialist content.
Feel free to look for yourself. Tell me the ratio of articles posted to this community as compared to my socialist articles. Check out my entire post history and tell me that ratio: https://lemmy.world/u/UniversalMonk?page=1&sort=New&view=Posts
Many many people have done SOOOO much more than this for that exact reason. A lot of them would even bother to have an account more than 3 months before election day!
I already know your thoughts. In fact you’ve had a few comments removed. And you’ve been banned from the World News comm for your comments.
But as I’ve mentioned several times, I believe you and I should focus on discussing the content of the articles posted from here on out, in order to keep with the spirit of this community. I feel that you get too personal in your attacks. Thank you!
Literally everyone gets banned from .ml’s world news for mentioning anything even vaguely, remotely anti China or anti Russia. That’s not the epic own you think it is, worldnews and honestly most of .ml is a cesspool of bad faith moderation.
It’s just as epic as when the poster showed a screenshot of a ban from a community I’ve never posted to and didn’t even know existed until I saw the screenshot. I wasn’t even notified of the ban.
In the screenshot I shared, there’s actual proof he posted there, unlike his screenshot of my info. Plus, some of his comments to me in this community have been removed for lack of civility today, as the screenshot shows.
Why do you keep claiming that you need to have posted on or have heard of a fediverse instance to be banned from it? Does it somehow “not count” if the person who was appalled by your posts saw them from another instance? Do you have other arbitrary criteria? It’s a really weird defense.
You’re either pretending not to understand that federation exists, or you truly somehow invested a thousand hours into a platform you’re clueless about.
https://dubvee.org/u/UniversalMonk@lemmy.world
Looks like they saw a bunch of your posts, banned you from the instance for “toxicity” and that prevented anything new from you from federating to their instance. Not too difficult to fathom.
Now, how’s about that check. Thank you!!!
Gee thanks for the reminder that the modlog is public information that exists! Thank you!!!
Yes they are public, and as looking at that proves, I have never even posted to that community.
And my posting history proves that as well.
Do you have any proof that I’ve posted to that community?
As I learned from some of the tech people in the tech sub, it was looked at and there are many people banned from that sub with no explanation. If you can find any posts that I have made to that community, be sure to update me!
In the meantime, I believe we should focus on discussing the content of the articles posted from here on out, in order to keep with the spirit of this community. Thank you!
Do you mean the post that was removed for breaking rules? The one that attracted a lot of downvotes and a few people dunking on you for obviously being butthurt about something no one has, or owes, an explanation for?
Two. It was two people. Lol
I have noticed that it really gets under your skin that you were banned from an entire instance for toxicity. Maybe you can do the research instead of demanding a stranger find out why an admin in the fediverse took the time to specifically ban you and then write “toxic” as the reason. I don’t get paid by you to do this research but maybe you can send me a few hundred USD to do so? In the meantime, if you don’t want to discuss it, I suggest you not bring the issue up again. Thank you!