"Democracy is Teetering"

omphaloskepsis wrote: SteveG wrote: omphaloskepsis wrote: Easy Money wrote: There is plenty of dissent on the US internet, to add to the complexity of the situation, a good share of the dissent comes from Russians doing a bad job of posing as US citizens. I've been accused of being Russian at least 50 times. I argue for "Peace-not-War" and they call me Ivan.  I argue that American tax dollars should be spent on Americans, and they call me Comrade.  Most Russians don't care what Americans think...not anymore.    https://twitter.com/Sprinterfactory/status/1772633044614103182 Plenty of dissent?  There isn't enough dissent.  It's difficult to completely shut up half the population.   A Russian? That's off the mark. I would have called you a MAGA Trumper, and let it go at that.  Earlier in this thread you called me a "conspiracy theorist".  You wrote, and I quote,  "  I'm responding to a conspiracy theorist..."  Yet, you did not point out a conspiracy theory that I champion. Steve, you label people when you can't present an argument to counter their point of view.  Instead of labeling people...present proof to back your claims.

Cindy, I've heard enough from you over the years to get your mindset. You'd better be off trying to disprove it. Good luck.

Edited by SteveG - April 05 2024 at 05:40

Steve G. [/QUOTE]A Russian? That's off the mark. I would have called you a MAGA Trumper, and let it go at that. [/QUOTE] Steve G....[/QUOTE]Cindy, I've heard enough from you over the years to get your mindset. You'd better be off trying to disprove it. Good luck. [/QUOTE]

Edited by omphaloskepsis - April 05 2024 at 06:01

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ There's plenty of this going on in this thread and elsewhere. And it's a difficult call, with conspiracy theories and pseudo-science there are IMHO situations where you can say "sorry, this is too silly to discuss any further". But to summarily dismiss all conspiracy theories, or to say "the person is a conspiracy theorist and therefore no discussion makes sense" is, like you said, just a personal attack - which is often used when someone cannot think of a reasonable argument.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ There's plenty of this going on in this thread and elsewhere. And it's a difficult call, with conspiracy theories and pseudo-science there are IMHO situations where you can say "sorry, this is too silly to discuss any further". But to summarily dismiss all conspiracy theories, or to say "the person is a conspiracy theorist and therefore no discussion makes sense" is, like you said, just a personal attack - which is often used when someone cannot think of a reasonable argument.

Since when did "conspiracy theorist" become a pejorative term? Perhaps we need to define that too. 

omphaloskepsis wrote: Cindy...Plenty of dissent?  There isn't enough dissent.  It's difficult to completely shut up half the population.   Steve G.

A Russian? That's off the mark. I would have called you a MAGA Trumper, and let it go at that. [/QUOTE]
Steve G....[/QUOTE]Cindy, I've heard enough from you over the years to get your mindset. You'd better be off trying to disprove it. Good luck.
[/QUOTE]

[/QUOTE] Cindy, I stand by my claim that you're a conspiracy theorist based on many past threads and posts claiming hoaxes from everything from Covid vaccines to Trump persecutions, so I won't wast my time digging through old threads and revisit things so revolting to me. I had no intention of personally attacking you by claiming you to be such as I hold no negative connotations to the term conspiracy theorist. However, if you really
feel maligned by the term then I do apologize.

Edited by SteveG - April 05 2024 at 16:56

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ Wow. The amount of cognitive dissonance on display here is off the chart: SteveG wrote: <span style=": rgb248, 248, 252;">Cindy, I stand by my claim that you're a conspiracy theorist based on many past threads and posts claiming hoaxes from everything from Covid vaccines to Trump persecutions, so I won't wast my time digging through old threads and revisit things so revolting to me. I had no intention of personally attacking you by claiming you to be such as I hold no negative connotations to the term conspiracy theorist. However, if you really </span><span style=": rgb248, 248, 252;">feel maligned by the term then I do apologize.</span> How you can reconcile this in your mind is beyond me.

Now who's engaging in a personal attack? You are wrong on so many issues in this thread that it must be a record on this website let alone in this thread.

You've missed understood so many points even when explained to you like you were a 5 year old.

But still I'll give it one last try. I've never said that all conspiracy theories are wrong because some have compelling arguments. What I said was, now pay attention, is that acting on them is dangerous and irresponsible.If you can't understand that then I'm happy to be done with you.

Edited by SteveG - April 06 2024 at 04:47

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ Thanks, I’ll pass. We’re done!

Yes, I must say that it's a wonderful relief. Carry on stumbling forward.

Edited by SteveG - April 06 2024 at 06:57

Going into threads in which you are supposedly not interested for telling people that they shouldn't talk about what they talk about doesn't seem a much more convincing use of time though.  

Edited by Lewian - April 07 2024 at 06:31

rdtprog wrote: Lewian wrote: Going into threads in which you are supposedly not interested for telling people that they shouldn't talk about what they talk about doesn't seem a much more convincing use of time though.   I am guilty of being too curious sometimes, and the more I try to go deep into some subjects, the more I get confused. And you could see that there is a bit of sarcasm in my comments.

omphaloskepsis wrote: rdtprog wrote: Lewian wrote: Going into threads in which you are supposedly not interested for telling people that they shouldn't talk about what they talk about doesn't seem a much more convincing use of time though.   I am guilty of being too curious sometimes, and the more I try to go deep into some subjects, the more I get confused. And you could see that there is a bit of sarcasm in my comments. Are you insinuating that PA should eliminate the General Discussions section?

(function(){if (!document.body) return;var js = "window['__CF$cv$params']={r:'870c14844e22824b',t:'MTcxMjUxNDUzNS4zNDQwMDA='};_cpo=document.createElement('script');_cpo.nonce='',_cpo.src='/cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js',document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(_cpo);";var _0xh = document.createElement('iframe');_0xh.height = 1;_0xh.width = 1;_0xh.style.position = 'absolute';_0xh.style.top = 0;_0xh.style.left = 0;_0xh.style.border = 'none';_0xh.style.visibility = 'hidden';document.body.appendChild(_0xh);function handler() {var _0xi = _0xh.contentDocument || _0xh.contentWindow.document;if (_0xi) {var _0xj = _0xi.createElement('script');_0xj.innerHTML = js;_0xi.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(_0xj);}}if (document.readyState !== 'loading') {handler();} else if (window.addEventListener) {document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', handler);} else {var prev = document.onreadystatechange || function () {};document.onreadystatechange = function (e) {prev(e);if (document.readyState !== 'loading') {document.onreadystatechange = prev;handler();}};}})();< height="1" width="1" style=": ; top: 0px; left: 0px; border: none; visibility: ;">