A recent Financial Times report quotes Palantir executive Alex Karp, a Silicon Valley bigwig who still backs Democrats but whose loyalty is wavering: “Political correctness in the party is a huge problem, the Democrats can’t yet understand the cost of it.” [emphasis added]

What I love about anyone who complains about “political correctness” is that it fundamentally frames it as being simply performative rather than “hey, don’t be an asshole”. It never seems to occur to them that some people honestly feel you shouldn’t be a dick, and instead just think people are doing it as virtue signaling. Sadly that kind of lack of empathy is rife with the tech bros.

Spoken like a true main character. So your input was essentially “I have no opinion”? Thank goodness you cleared that up for us, bud!

Remember that’s not “charactor” - I know you have trouble with that one.

Thanks! Appreciate it!

So no intent to have genuine good faith engagement? You’re just ding dong ditching and running away - except you stick around and discuss everything other than the articles you share.

Wasn’t asking you and I have no idea why anyone would care about your specific input. This was a suggestion based on the source of the article, not the fact you posted it.

So I’ll ask again: can you say what specifically you found interesting about this article in particular? i.e. what did you find newsworthy about it.

@jordanlund@lemmy.world Can we get a rule about no articles from aggregators (e.g. MSN & Yahoo News) as it essentially breaks the MBFC bot? It also essentially hides duplicates.

So is there a reason all your news seems to originate from Yahoo and MSN news aggregators? Would expect a committed socialist to eschew such bourgeoisie sources. Perhaps you’d get a more positive reception if you didn’t post such dreck sources?

It continues to surprise me how a “socialist” like the OP keeps finding and sharing articles from the Washington Examiner. It’s like the Washington Times, but somehow much worse. I could understand it if it was a conservative leaning quality publication, but it’s essentially just a fascist Weekly World News.

It’s interesting how these third party candidates only seem to care about genocide when Russia and China are not directly involved. Hmm, what could be the common denominator in all this I wonder?!

I mean, DeSantis has already banned mention of climate change and its effects from curriculums and government docs, so you’re not far off

You’re sealioning again bud. You said you wouldn’t reply to me in a separate thread, you then replied to me, and I called you on it. As usual, you can’t stick to the subject at hand. Are you going to address the fact that you edited your response right after I replied, and that you do this frequently?

You do know folks can see when you’ve edited a comment after posting, right? In fact, as of right now you’ve edited four of your last seven comments after posting. If that’s not a sign that you should slow down and think before commenting, I don’t know what is.

And did you just find out how to take screen caps? You seem to be doing this a lot lately like it proves something when all it shows is that you edited your post and downvoted my comments

Edit: see, like that 👆

Your initial reply was just the first sentence:

Fun! So what citizen or politican are you referring to?

I replied and then you added all the rest. Poor etiquette to change something that someone has replied to without noting the edit. And you didn’t even bother to correct the misspelling

Oh, I’m well aware. The difference is that account had basically just as many posts and almost half the comments you made - and he’s been here for two months and you’ve been around for at least a year. If he just posted his articles and made a sane amount of comments that weren’t constantly trolling, he’d have a lot easier time, but he literally goes out of his way to be disruptive in the comments

Interesting how you also significantly changed the comment I replied to, without noting how you changed it.

Friend, I think with you and I, it’s just best if I don’t reply to you. No matter what I say, I think it’s going to frustrate you. So I’ll just pass on discussing things with you.

Your words, correct? And yet you then reply to me just moments later. Troll.

Word of the day: quisling: a citizen or politician of an occupied country who collaborates with an enemy occupying force – or more generally as a synonym for traitor or collaborator.

So trolling then, got it.

You stated:

My ban reason says “sealioning” and not “trolling.” If they wanted to ban me for “trolling” they could have said “trolling.”

We got clarification from the mods that “all sealioning is trolling"

Are you still going to be claiming otherwise?

Well you are certainly free to say that now if you want to.

Thank you I guess? Such a boon.

But I will keep saying that I was banned for “sealioning” because that’s what the modlog says. I fully expect you to jump in every time I say it, to update with your thoughts. And that’s ok!

I mean, you were banned for sealioning, which is a type of trolling - as one of the community mods explained. To deny you were trolling now would probably give the mods something to think about next time you become an issue. Denying you were trolling just shows you’re not here to engage in good faith and makes every post and comment you make suspect.

Now that you have a response from a mod on the fact you were indeed banned for trolling, we’re good, right?