Motherfuckers created a rule about how pointing out that overpopulation myths are ecofascistic lobbying is actually "bad faith" somehow so now every post, no matter what it is about, full of "this is why billions must die" bullshit.
There's 500k subscribers btw.
No idea what you're rambling on about.
I gotta ask, are you incapable of reading or are you unwilling to read? Because DivineChaos100 responded to you with two links to NYT articles about this issue, in this comment, which was posted before CarmineCatboy2 asked you to comment on those NYT articles. And yet, you're here acting as though this didn't happen. But I can read and I understand what time stamps are, so I know that you have been shown evidence that the NYT believes similar things to the r/Collapse subreddit before this comment where you pretend such a thing never happened.
So I'll repeat CarmineCatboy2's question to you, and maybe you'll answer it this time: Were you surprised to discover that the new york crimes echoes the same ecofascist genocidal sentiments that we see on reddit?
You've missed an option here which is the option I noted: I didn't understand CarmineCatboy2's question.
CarmineCatboy2 didn't ask me to comment on those NYT articles, they mentioned "new york crimes" which only now that I've read your comment do I realise is a play on the name "New York Times".
I'm not acting. I didn't understand what CarmineCatboy2 was going on about and I said as much. If I might be so bold as to offer some unsolicited advice: maybe in future just assume that when someone says they don't understand what another is saying, they're doing so because they don't understand what the other is saying.
I'll rephrase this question in order to favour clear communication:
Were you surprised to discover that the New York Times echoed the same ecofascist genocidal sentiments that we see on Reddit?
I made no such discovery, I didn't look at the New York Times articles that were linked to. Had I discovered that, I would not be surprised.
sounds like you have a tendency to resist leaving your ideological tribal traps
LOL not sure what tribal ideological traps you think the New York Times would have the weight to cause me to leave
i don't know, you tell me why you refuse to read links to ecofascism in the mainstream media. after all, you're the person who thinks there's nothing to be concerned about.
I haven't refused as nobody has asked me to read the linked-to articles. They've only expected me to.
I've been expecting you to shit yourself.
deleted by creator
I admit it never even so much as crossed my mind that someone on the internet (and specifically commenting all over this thread) might not understand that the phrase "new york crimes" refers to the NYT. So one point to you I suppose.
This probably also explains why you're confused in the subthread where someone told you this isn't the first time recently you've defended
You probably think they're actually talking about the website actually called Stormfront. They're not. They're talking about reddit, which you did, in fact, defend not 20 hours ago.
I disagree. I wasn't defending Reddit, I was questioning the rationality of a Lemmy poster. There's a difference.
Oh wow that's so interesting
No investigation, no right to speak.