Lmao you don't engage with those that do, instead you choose to post shit like this. If you were actually interested you would answer the questions @Awoo@hexbear.net gave you, but you didn't, because you don't. This is what I'm talking about when I say you exist in an echo chamber
This is a common pattern. Awoo is very good about engaging with liberals in good faith and asking questions that would be easy to answer if the person answering them has a genuine interest in the topic. For some reason, she tends to get ignored. Seems like a thankless task, really.
I always enjoy seeing awoos polite takedowns and the stunning silence they leave, because I can always point to them when the intruding lib inevitably complains about being treated rudely and people not engaging in good faith. It's like a failsafe. This is a perfect example.
It's so easy to genuinely engage with them and expose the fact that they actually don't know anything about the topic.
For most of us here, who have an understanding that goes waaaaay beyond that of reading a fucking wikipedia article, it's super easy to get into details that simply aren't covered by them and make them feel out of their depth.
I take this approach because the silence many of them leave is deafening and exposes a lot. But, for a rare few, it makes them actually think about how they don't know anything. For some of them they simply have never had it exposed to themselves that their entire understanding is derived from quickly glossing over a wiki article. The ones that cite wikipedia are the most obvious examples of this, these are the ones with the lowest understanding.
And if they do engage? Well some of them actually end up doing some critical thinking. I find people tend to be more willing to engage over China things than Ukraine. I think people feel more self-assured that what they know about China is true so their confidence levels to engage are higher. It's the lack of confidence that causes them to ignore me @Raebxeh@hexbear.net
I don't find it easy at all, I think your patience is impressive. I remember spending a lot of time engaging earnestly with one user, trying to make them wrap their head around the concept of "source critique" to make them understand why they couldn't just skim wikipedia and call it a day. They did all the bad faith lib debatelord stuff that you run into and it just never stopped.
That interaction was kinda it for me, after that I just can't be bothered to be as nice and calm as you.
I'm not really engaging earnestly with them. I go through the motions fully expecting nothing. I do this because one, it exposes them for lurkers and two, on very rare occasions it sets a person on the path to deprogramming.
The appearance of earnest engagement is just an aesthetic I pull off because it is necessary to achieve both of the above outcomes. Authenticity is the quality I am for but deep down I am jaded and bored of doing this all the time. However I can never bring myself to stop, not given that I've seen first hand the creation of new comrades from it.
Removed by mod
Lmao you don't engage with those that do, instead you choose to post shit like this. If you were actually interested you would answer the questions @Awoo@hexbear.net gave you, but you didn't, because you don't. This is what I'm talking about when I say you exist in an echo chamber
This is a common pattern. Awoo is very good about engaging with liberals in good faith and asking questions that would be easy to answer if the person answering them has a genuine interest in the topic. For some reason, she tends to get ignored. Seems like a thankless task, really.
I always enjoy seeing awoos polite takedowns and the stunning silence they leave, because I can always point to them when the intruding lib inevitably complains about being treated rudely and people not engaging in good faith. It's like a failsafe. This is a perfect example.
@Awoo@hexbear.net thank you for your service
It's so easy to genuinely engage with them and expose the fact that they actually don't know anything about the topic.
For most of us here, who have an understanding that goes waaaaay beyond that of reading a fucking wikipedia article, it's super easy to get into details that simply aren't covered by them and make them feel out of their depth.
I take this approach because the silence many of them leave is deafening and exposes a lot. But, for a rare few, it makes them actually think about how they don't know anything. For some of them they simply have never had it exposed to themselves that their entire understanding is derived from quickly glossing over a wiki article. The ones that cite wikipedia are the most obvious examples of this, these are the ones with the lowest understanding.
And if they do engage? Well some of them actually end up doing some critical thinking. I find people tend to be more willing to engage over China things than Ukraine. I think people feel more self-assured that what they know about China is true so their confidence levels to engage are higher. It's the lack of confidence that causes them to ignore me @Raebxeh@hexbear.net
I don't find it easy at all, I think your patience is impressive. I remember spending a lot of time engaging earnestly with one user, trying to make them wrap their head around the concept of "source critique" to make them understand why they couldn't just skim wikipedia and call it a day. They did all the bad faith lib debatelord stuff that you run into and it just never stopped.
That interaction was kinda it for me, after that I just can't be bothered to be as nice and calm as you.
I'm not really engaging earnestly with them. I go through the motions fully expecting nothing. I do this because one, it exposes them for lurkers and two, on very rare occasions it sets a person on the path to deprogramming.
The appearance of earnest engagement is just an aesthetic I pull off because it is necessary to achieve both of the above outcomes. Authenticity is the quality I am for but deep down I am jaded and bored of doing this all the time. However I can never bring myself to stop, not given that I've seen first hand the creation of new comrades from it.
Modern day Socretes.
Nooooooooooooo
Please change your avatar picture to a condescending bust.
Ehh it's the whole "the comment isn't for the person you're responding to, it's for the reader"
Listening to a liberals dumb shit talking points they got filtered through colbert from the Biden campaign has no value.
Her showing that the liberals don't have anything of substance to contribute other than reddit bot comments is way more valuable IMHO.
deleted by creator