• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    You’re creating a strawman of me to argue against.

    It’s pretty clearly in bad faith. Why not actually respond to anything else I said instead of quoting one short sentence outside of any context and building a bunch of assumptions around it?

    It’s laughable to suggest that my vote against genocide has no one’s best interest in mind but my own.

    Your claim that I’m speaking from a place of privilege and entitlement also falls pretty flat when it’s the high and privileged place of entitlement that’s defined by rejecting genocide.

    Why not try a different line of reasoning.

    • @Rhoeri
      link
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Because there is no reasoning with you. There never was, and there never will be. You all make sure of that when you refuse to argue in good faith. So to counter- I’m not here to reason with you, I’m here to ensure people reading along can see the foolishness in your ideology.

      And based on the ratios- it seems to me that they do.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        13 months ago

        From your perspective what would constitute a good faith argument for me to make?

        I’ve tried to be civil and respectful even when I’m being treated with veiled insults and direct baseless accusations even when you finally end up appealing to your viewpoints popularity.

        Doesn’t this seem a little beyond parody to you?

        • @Rhoeri
          link
          English
          03 months ago

          Again, I’m not here to reason with you, I’m here to ensure people reading along can see the foolishness in your ideology.

          Save the false civility. I’m not buying it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            13 months ago

            So my civility is false, nothing I say is in good faith and you’re just here for the laughs.

            what is my ideology?