I mean they just shared a meme from an instance you aren't federated with and quickly had like 20 people trying to demand complex conversations about history with them.
A lot of the complaints directed at them would be better served directed at whoever made the meme.
Maybe don't share history memes you don't even remotely understand that vilify people whose perspective you don't remotely understand? Dude has received some real softball questions and whiffed.
But OP doesn't give a shit, his ideology is "Dae tabkies bad" and the actual historical claims are secondary.
If someone writes as many replies (and as long of replies) as OP, they don't get to pull the "I don't owe you an explanation" card. They've already put in the time; writing 10,000 words and refusing to address hard questions in any of them just means you don't have good answers.
If I go visit a friend and they act like an ass, the fact they're acting like an ass doesn't change because we're at their house. If they talk all day, argue their points where convenient, then pull "I don't owe you an explanation" when you try to make that a two-sided conversation, they're just full of shit when they complain about how burdensome that is for them or whatever.
And no one knows who made this meme, but the person posting it and defending it is right here.
Well the more original OP of the post would be a better target at least.
And all of what what you said is true, but in that analogy I would say my point you are free to not be this persons friend and not spend time in their house. You don't have to convince them to explain themselves for your decision to not be their friend anymore to be valid.
I am simply saying that this bullshit about "they don't owe you anything" is complete pablum. If you make a claim, especially an accusation of essentially being genocidal, you are thereby inviting counterclaims. Who gives a shit what instance it's on? If he denies the Holocaust to his houseguests, that is not particularly better or worse than denying it while he is someone else's guest because the principle problem is the claim itself.
I don't know what you want me to do about it I guess?
I'm trying to be practical. You want them to engage with counterclaims, and I'm just saying there is no way to make them do that? I agree with your right to make those counterclaims.
I like the instance despite not being on it and have no particular disagreement with these people, but I was was forced to see a fedpost and their defenders here. This is neither his home nor private.
If OP had the tiniest scrap of good faith in their being, things would have gone differently
I mean they just shared a meme from an instance you aren't federated with and quickly had like 20 people trying to demand complex conversations about history with them.
A lot of the complaints directed at them would be better served directed at whoever made the meme.
Maybe don't share history memes you don't even remotely understand that vilify people whose perspective you don't remotely understand? Dude has received some real softball questions and whiffed.
But OP doesn't give a shit, his ideology is "Dae tabkies bad" and the actual historical claims are secondary.
This is literally their instance IMO they don't really owe anyone anything here.
Bad takes are allowed within the privacy of one's own home.
If someone writes as many replies (and as long of replies) as OP, they don't get to pull the "I don't owe you an explanation" card. They've already put in the time; writing 10,000 words and refusing to address hard questions in any of them just means you don't have good answers.
I guess that is my position
This is their house, you came here, if they don't have any good answers that's fine because they don't owe you any.
I really think it would be more productive to focus your frustrations at the person who made the meme.
If I go visit a friend and they act like an ass, the fact they're acting like an ass doesn't change because we're at their house. If they talk all day, argue their points where convenient, then pull "I don't owe you an explanation" when you try to make that a two-sided conversation, they're just full of shit when they complain about how burdensome that is for them or whatever.
And no one knows who made this meme, but the person posting it and defending it is right here.
Well the more original OP of the post would be a better target at least.
And all of what what you said is true, but in that analogy I would say my point you are free to not be this persons friend and not spend time in their house. You don't have to convince them to explain themselves for your decision to not be their friend anymore to be valid.
I can walk away, sure, but the point is their excuse of "I don't owe you an explanation" in this context is a dishonest deflection tactic.
If I lie to you, me saying "you're free to talk to someone else" doesn't change the fact that I lied to you.
Again I agree with those, but that being that case doesn't make demanding engagement and such into good behavior. At best, it is unproductive.
"Look, it's his instance, he can do blood libel if he wants"
I don't give a shit what he can do, the question is what he should do. Spouting heinous lies uncritically is bad in any social setting.
If you wanted to convince them of what they should do your methods are strange.
Idk if you think I'm trying to defend their stance or this meme or something, I'm not. I just don't see the point of all this yelling past each other.
I am simply saying that this bullshit about "they don't owe you anything" is complete pablum. If you make a claim, especially an accusation of essentially being genocidal, you are thereby inviting counterclaims. Who gives a shit what instance it's on? If he denies the Holocaust to his houseguests, that is not particularly better or worse than denying it while he is someone else's guest because the principle problem is the claim itself.
I don't know what you want me to do about it I guess?
I'm trying to be practical. You want them to engage with counterclaims, and I'm just saying there is no way to make them do that? I agree with your right to make those counterclaims.
You're the one who has been wagging your finger about what they do or don't "owe"
Well I mean it literally. You can't sue them for an answer on the internet.
You're arguing based on a stance no one took
Ok?
I like the instance despite not being on it and have no particular disagreement with these people, but I was was forced to see a fedpost and their defenders here. This is neither his home nor private.
edit: He's the mod lol.
I was trying to be poetic about saying "they are the admin and they are being a good sport letting everyone come in this thread and yell at them"
It isn't a home, but it is theirs. They could just be deleting everything and banning everyone.