Leopards Ate My Face

5665 readers

1093 users here now

Rules:

If you don't already have some understanding of what this is, try reading this post. Off-topic posts will be removed.
Please use a high-quality source to explain why your post fits if you think it might not be common knowledge and isn't explained within the post itself.
Links to articles should be high-quality sources – for example, not the Daily Mail, the New York Post, Newsweek, etc. For a rough idea, check out this list. If it's marked in red, it probably isn't allowed; if it's yellow, exercise caution.
The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a comment removed, you're encouraged to appeal it.
For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the comments.
All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.

Also feel free to check out [email protected] (also active).

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1422

MAGAt loses his federal job (midwest.social)

submitted 4 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

213 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Cross posted from Discuit

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I made an argument you’re just too dug in to accept anything other than a filmed interview with the MAGAt in question.

I’ve dodged nothing. I’ve clearly explained my reasoning in multiple comment threads. You just don’t like it. That’s fine but let’s not pretend I’ve dodged just because you can’t fathom someone disagrees with you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You're just saying "most people". 60 % is "most people", but that doesn't mean you can just assume the 40% don't exist. You're jumping into conclusions.

And no, I don't know if the numbers are 60 and 40, or even the other way around. What I'm saying that you do not have enough data to be as sure about this being a falsehood as you are.

I do agree that it's entirely possible that the story hasn't happened, but it's not okay to deem someone guilty of something based on a guess.

About likelihoods: if you cross a motorway on foot, you most likely will not be run over. If 10000 people cross a motorway at different places at the same moment, some of them will get hit for sure. Most will not, but that doesn't mean that nobody will. "Most people" ≠ "everyone". You haven't even told where the "most people wouldn't" comes from, but even if it did have something to it, it would still be only "most", not "everyone" or even "practically everyone".

Internet would be a lot better place if people did less jumping into conclusions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You’re splitting hairs. You know what I am saying. It is unusual. I don’t need a lesson in the word “most” thank you. If you’d like to have a real discussion please leave the patronizing explanations out of it.

You’ve also got it backwards. The assumption should be that this is bullshit and that it is possible it happened. Not the other way around.