The former president’s authoritarian tendencies are alarming enough without inventing new outrages.

  • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    20 days ago

    Yes, the mark of being non-contrary – cherry picking the opinion you already agree with as evidence

    • abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 days ago

      Not cherry-picking, I said I came to the same conclusion independently of the mod.

      But in a way, you could consider me a test. If you can change my mind with your arguments and statistics, then perhaps jordanlund would also be convinced by the same post replies.

      (I’m not guaranteeing it, in fact considering that I’m not a mod here, I’m probably a lower bar to convince than jordanlund or the other mods.)

      • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        You’re clearly picking the less popular opinion. This is either obvious to you or it isn’t. The numbers are there, and you chose your reading of them. I cannot do anything about that.

        • abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          No, I agree. My conclusion puts me on the less popular opinion on this one matter, and that’s obvious to me. However, I was replying to a thread asking for someone to be banned, and - just as we don’t automatically convict folks in court on the basis of popular opinion, I feel that it would be nice if stronger standards also applied before someone got a ban.

          (Not saying the full criminal defendant protections should apply mind, as this is just a ban on one magazine or one instance in the fediverse, so it’s not like we need to apply the full protections against depriving someone of their freedom as they are locked in jail, here.)

          That said, if my reading of the numbers is wrong, I am open to having that explained - that is I’m open to admitting I’m wrong. (If one checks my history, they’ll find that I’ve done so multiple times.)