this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
59601 readers
2940 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I wholeheartedly agree, it's just that I haven't seen it, and that doesn't mean he is NOT queerphobic. I was simply asking questions. If you don't like that, what can I do about that?
Have you also not seen enough to learn why the “just asking questions” justification isn’t super effective around here?
It’s used as thinly veiled cover for spreading malicious bullshit while pretending the speaker isn’t lying to their audience. I’m not accusing you of this, in fact I’m explaining it hoping that you’re genuine.
yes I had a feeling actually. But jesus fuck that is depressing, how else should one phrase it then? I try hard to think people are not dumber than decades ago, but it's seriously hard to keep on believing that sometimes. Now I have to jump through hoops just in order to be perceived as neutral? I'm out.
Yeah it’s depressing and stupid, but for what it’s worth, it is much less about you and much more about all the bad faith fucknuggets out there who have spent decades learning to mimic good faith curious people.
I utterly detest the use of "wholeheartedly agree" when people have caveats. It truly goes against the concept of wholeheartedness. It is sufficient to indicate that you agree completely and then be silent. That you don't suggests your caveat has more value and meaning to you than the point you are 'wholeheartedly' agreeing with.
You are either being willfully obtuse or are actively a troll. Either way, we've all already used up more metabolism on you than is worthwhile. If you cannot bother to be informed about something as easy to know as this, and yet spout off multiple replies to defend your position, then you're not here in good faith.
I said I "wholeheartedly agree" with "it being on me" that I haven't seen something. Obviously. How can it not? Is it on you? No. You're being so incredibly stupid and prejudiced that it's hard to fathom. Now fuck off, you're right about wasting metabolism