Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)L
Posts
34
Comments
4086
Joined
2 yr. ago

Compulsive comment editor in good faith.

#Sorry not sorry for the edit

  • And that is, itself, a statement about genocide. Saying that people are “hyper-fixated” on genocide, and that they shouldn’t be, that they should “move the fuck on” and that “the world doesn’t revolve around genocide” is saying that genocide isn’t that big of a deal actually, that it’s just a matter of preference, like whether you like waffles or pancakes.

    The part that you're missing is "in other people's minds when they make a judgment" because the commenter was making broad generalizations about centrists. Something you left out of your hypothetical by removing the context. Yes, genocide is a huge deal in and of itself, but it's not an enormous weight in people's minds generally speaking. The more thoughtful ones probably do, but it's an out-of-sight-out-of-mind type of deal. It usually happens on the other side of the world for Americans.

    Do you see how I'm not saying that we should downplay genocide, but rather the commenter needs to take down a peg the weight they give it to arrive at their conclusion? Do you see how I'm staying within context when you stop your shrieking about it?

    Now you did. I said that you were minimizing genocide.

    And I just explained how I was not, and that I DID jump through the hoop, and I can prove that I did. Don't make shit up.

    Brother, it was not a “trap.”

    Besides it being an obvious trap, you absolutely admitted it was a trap, and then you said that you were intending to incriminate me either way. Don't play these fucking games.

    What kind of “trap-setter” explains their trap?

    You. It doesn't magically stop being a trap in the same way that a puzzle doesn't stop being a puzzle because the puzzle maker said that's what it was. I even linked to the video explaining how those incriminating statements work. Don't piss on my leg.

    I asked you a very simple, staightforward, and perfectly fair hypothetical

    Absolutely not. You divorced what I was saying from the context and turned it into absolutes that I was not claiming. Which, incidentally, is the same reason why you think I hold a contradictory position, because you refuse to understand what was said and would rather shriek at me about what YOU THOUGHT I said.

    And, honestly, I'm quite fed up with you. You either get what I said or you don't. I won't spoon-feed you again.

  • Yes, that’s what I said, you were talking about genocide.

    Do you know what meta is? Did you know that you can describe the concept of a topic and aspects of said topic without necessarily going into it? Because I clearly was talking about the hyper-fixation people have on the genocide as a topic. Do I need to link it again?

    Yes, genocide is bad, yada yada yada, but there's a time and place for everything, and using genocide for manipulating the public discourse as the other commenter was doing to rail against centrists and Democrats was a cheap shot and abusive. You can see what they were doing in their comment history. I referenced this earlier, and you said, "where can I find this??"

    Ok? That's the fucking topic. Not the genocide itself. Everything around the topic of genocide was the topic. Got it now?

    Why do you keep saying this? Are you a mind-reader?

    Because I refuse to believe you're this dense. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're smart enough to understand, and that pretending not to understand is the next most logical conclusion, because what I'm saying is quite straightforward if you get what meta is.

    I genuinely, 100% believe that you were minimizing genocide.

    How?? I said the thing, I jumped through your hoop, I overexplained and keep overexplaining myself. Why is it so difficult to understand? Is it really that inconceivable?

    It seems like it would’ve been really fucking easy to say “No, that wouldn’t justify the Holocaust”

    No, you set up a trap. You don't set up traps when you want straight answers. You ask directly what they mean rather than play stupid mind games that get people to second-guess your intentions.

    instead of playing this game where you refuse to answer and then answer like 20 comments later in a different thread.

    YOU dragged the conversation to c/memes. YOU wanted to "expose me" over here, "in front of the class". We had a beautiful thing going on over there. This was a one-off comment because I found it funny. Oh, but now it's my fault. lol..

  • Then why couldn’t you earlier?

    Also, btw, I did:

    "Yes, genocide is bad. Yes, genocide should be fought. Yes, the Democrats and Republicans have blood on their hands. And yet that doesn’t mean everything is genocide. Move the fuck on. The world is big, and there are a million other things at play."

    Funny how I keep circling back to this one single post. What more do you want?

  • Both you, and the person you originally replied to.

    My comment was on the topic of genocide you two are hyper-fixating on. I was very clear on this and I clarified very early on. You chose not to listen. You still choose not to listen and now pretend you're surprised.

    You attempted to minimize genocide

    You PRETEND I do so you could have an excuse to clutch your pearls and get people on your side. What a better way to vilify the other person than to accuse them of being gasp pro-genocide? You know damn well you can get people on your side that way who are cruising Lemmy on autopilot. I can see right through you.

    Then why couldn’t you earlier?

    Why should I if that was not the topic? That was your loaded topic. You want me to jump through your fucking hoops and I don't have to. You keep hyper-fixating on the holocaust because it's an easy way for you to get your fucking upvotes while trying to make others look bad and win your arguments. This is nothing but a game to you.

    Face it, you don't care about the genocide at all, you only care about winning. You're not genuine, you only want to bicker.

  • Who the fuck is talking about genocides? Only you. I gave you an explicit example where I literally removed the word genocide from the sentence to explain my meta-comment, and it's been nothing but genocide on your part.

    Then you're all Pikachu-face confused when it turns out that I'm well-read on genocide and that I denounce it freely.

    Why? Because you actively have not been fucking listening. All you want is a pissing contest. Asshole.

    https://lemmy.world/post/40389131/21129741

  • For the second time, the actual context is "the world doesn't revolve around genocide" for centrists to make a judgment. "Move the fuck on" because centrists don't base their entire set of opinions around this one topic you're hyperfixating on.

    I've already explained this. You chose not to listen. You then fixated on the fucking waffles instead. Remember? Of course you don't, because that'd expose you as being disingenuous from the beginning.

  • This is the first time you’ve said anything close to an argument of why you reject my hypothetical that isn’t just rejecting hypotheticals altogether, so I’ll address it. I didn’t overload the premise. I literally changed one thing: I made it about the Holocaust instead of Gaza. That’s it. How does doing that “overload the premise?”

    Nah, don't play stupid. Your entire fucking hypothetical rested on what a Nazi would say, by literally feeding it my words taken out of context and ignoring my explanation for why I had said what I said from the beginning.

    t’s not somehow my fault for pointing out that your arguments would also justify the Holocaust.

    Where the fuck do you get this idea that I'm justifying the Holocaust or any genocide at all?? Hello? Why is this a thing we have to discuss and for me to defend? Your entire exercise is so stupid because it doesn't lead to anything other than setting up a trap. You're not arguing in good faith. And somehow it's my fault for not accepting it. You're delusional.

    Just because a hypothetical makes you look bad doesn’t mean it’s invalid.

    It's stupid because it's so far removed from what we're actually discussing. You want to have a certain conversation on your own terms without realizing how divorced it is from the main point that matters. And I know you're doing that shit on purpose because it doesn't matter what I say, but how you try to make me look. Eat shit.

  • Weird, because I used to think you were a pedo, and now you changed the tactic to being an anti-pedo. Why the change, huh? Suspicious.

  • I understood that analogy perfectly, as well as how utterly monstrous it was to make.

    I wish you had understood the one where I abstracted away the word "genocide" that you had fixated on so you could understand what my meta-comment was about. Or how you should've understood that you're the type of person to interject with "but how can you hate waffles!" when someone says they like pancakes. Sounds to me like you didn't understand anything at all.

    I did.

    Oh, and what's this? Now you're questioning whether I sound like a good person? Where's the evil Nazi you were accusing me of being just a second ago, huh?

    It’s not my fault you don’t understand hypotheticals.

    It's not my fault you make shitty and overloaded hypotheticals. Also, let me remind you that refusing to answer does not mean failing to understand. I simply side-stepped it, bucko.

  • Huh, you sound like a good person who cares about genocide, then

    HUH FUNNY HOW THAT IS.

    It's like you're not fucking listening. 😂

  • by calling them "invented unfair scenarios.

    I mean, if you're serving shit, I'm gonna call it shit. If you overload the premise, it's not exactly analyzing anything of value. I still don't understand why we have to do this exercise for you to be satisfied, rather than focusing on what was said in the context without the bullshit. It makes no sense to do this besides you wanting to control the narrative.

    Yes, because you said Nazi shit. I didn’t “misconstrue” anything. I also lost count.

    And you're a pedo. Prove me wrong.

    Yes, you did say Nazi shit to somebody else, I’m not sure why it matters who it is you’re saying Nazi shit to.

    Because you're a nosy-ass, stubborn busybody. You literally cannot let go of the fact that someone said something you disagreed with, and you took it to heart, far worse than if it had been said to you.

    I did, multiple times. That’s what my hypothetical was asking.

    Don't start with your shit. Your hypothetical was asking a loaded and incriminating question regardless of how I answered it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF3WWxSrv5E

    OK! Great! Progress! You finally answered my hypothetical then, despite refusing to for some reason the first dozen times I asked.

    OMG! It's like you were being disingenuous! Until you rephrased it! :D What a curious turn of events! OMG! I still don't understand why that has to be explicitly said to you as if this site were filled to the brim with Nazis that need to be identified. This whole exercise that people like you do is so fucking stupid.

    So, since the Holocaust was evil, even though we could imagine someone saying all the same shit about how “the world doesn’t revolve around genocide” and people need to “move the fuck on,” it clearly shows that those are not valid things to say about genocides in general, and are, in fact, pretty fucked up.

    So, now it’s unclear. Before, you said a bunch of Nazi shit. Now, you’re contradicting what you said before. So I don’t really know what to make of that.

    Funny how now I need to explain myself ALL OVER AGAIN. Damn, it's like you're doing this on purpose.

  • I gave a condensed version

    ... that benefited only you. Why don't you include any of your own sins in there? Do you really think you're a saint?

    I literally referenced that.

    Quote it like you did everything else. It doesn't cost you a damn thing.

    I can’t link that part because it doesn’t exist and never happened.

    Oh, right, we're still doing that bit, pretending we don't understand basic analogies while trying to shove entire hypotheticals in people's faces. Jfc, listen to yourself.

    You didn’t “prove your point”

    What point? Proving I'm not a Nazi? How about you prove that you're not a pedo? The burden of proof falls on you to prove that I am. All you have are your stupid and loaded hypotheticals.

  • Inb4 the "but you haven't ExPlIcItLy DeNoUnCeD tHe hoLuCaUsT" because you can't read between the lines. I know the horrors. Discovering its history is actually one of the most memorable moments of my teenage years. The harrowing thought that people could behave like this to one another changed me in ways no other thing has. I've read the books, some of them twice. And I haven't even mentioned the other genocides, like the Rape of Nanking, that left me disheartened for weeks after reading it. Or the My Lai Massacre. Or even Gaza.

    But none of that matters when we have some utter assholes on the internet using it as a cheap excuse to entertain themselves at the expense of others, as you and the other guy have. After all of this, I can confidently say that neither of your concerns is genuine, and that your only goal is to grind a stupid and superficial axe for cheap internet points. Rather than give the people the benefit of the doubt and allow people to share their thoughts and ideas, you'd rather go for the jugular. You'd much rather spend the day accusing, bickering, and vilifying than trying to understand. You're an extension of the hate. You're despicable.

  • Damn, and you still have to provide only a partial context? Only the bits that benefit you and make you seem like the victim, huh.

    How about you share the parts where you relentlessly accuse me of being a Nazi? The part where you misconstrue what I'm saying and purposely fail to grasp my point? The part where I actually fight back by falsely accusing you to prove my point, by using the same tactics you used to accuse me baselessly?

    You're nothing but a mean girl, Katie.

  • Because, dumbass

    There it is! The flaps of rotten skin hanging from the back that were tied up in a bun. So much for trying to look good.

    they’re a perfectly valid form of reasoning

    You know what's also an even more valid form of reasoning? Sticking to what actually happened instead of inventing unfair scenarios.

    I haven’t misconstrued a single thing you’ve said,

    How many times have you called me a Nazi, exactly? I should've kept count, but it was literally every single comment for a while. You've also lied, pretending you didn't understand a basic analogy, and barraged me repeatedly over something I said to somebody else. And now you're even trying to lie to others about me by giving a partial context, just enough to give the wrong idea, so that they get on your side early.

    where you were trying to shame me.

    I simply said it was you because it is. I also thought it was really funny that you were trying to look good in the top comments so that people would upvote you. Now you're devolving to the nasty little gremlin that you truly are, and I hope people can see that.

    Really, the only thing I’ve done is ask you is whether the Holocaust was justified or not

    You have not, you just did. I can unequivocally say the Holocaust is evil because--get this--I have a bit of Jewish and native ancestry. Le gasp. But no, you'd rather put people down instead by lying like this.

  • We don’t even need the hypothetical

    That's what I've been saying all along. Why even bother with this bullshit and pretend it's somehow the ultimate litmus test when we could've been discussing the facts? Oh, right, we tried that to no avail on your part.

    is it valid to say the exact things you say about one genocide about other genocides? Yes or no.

    How about this: Is it valid to accuse, misconstrue, bully, lie, attempt to publicly shame, and purposely misrepresent others under the guise of being an anti-genocide white knight by twisting people's words even after they have fully explained what they meant and refuse to acknowledge that? Yes or no.

    You talk a lot about human rights, and yet you fail to respect the people who are right in front of you.

  • No, I'm literally saying yours is, actually. But talk about the failed education system some more, why don't cha. Embody this post for us all, please.

  • Brother, you're setting up a false narrative and asking me to debunk it. How is that not deceptive? 😂

  • Funny: Home of the Haha @lemmy.world

    Involuntary purity culture

  • People Twitter @sh.itjust.works

    Feeding local wildlife

  • Gay: News, Memes and Discussion @lemmy.world

    Queer TikToks to rot our brain cell with 🤗

  • Fuck AI @lemmy.world

    What is the biggest number?

  • Videos @lemmy.world

    I Survived 7 Days On The Hardest Server... (Dinosaur documentary-style gameplay with great storytelling) | The Isle | yellowtones

  • Videos @lemmy.world

    The Science Behind the Gang Wars of Whales | Casual Geographic

  • The Epstein Files @lemmy.world

    Epstein's niece, Anya Wick (formerly Anya Beth Epstein), speaks openly about her family's dark past

  • You Should Know @lemmy.world

    YSK that you can force Windows 10/11 to open your default browser instead of MS Edge with MSEdgeRedirect

    github.com /rcmaehl/MSEdgeRedirect
  • cats @lemmy.world

    Toby took the anesthetic very well!

  • Microblog Memes @lemmy.world

    The collective unconscious

  • Canvas @toast.ooo

    I never knew such beautiful words could exist in German

  • Off My Chest @lemmy.world

    I like how the Fediverse is largely left. The other site had too much right-wing noise.

  • A Boring Dystopia @lemmy.world

    Tesla’s robotaxi can’t drive in the rain, and dumps passengers if the weather looks risky. | FuelArc

    fuelarc.com /cars/teslas-robotaxi-cant-drive-in-the-rain-and-dumps-passengers-if-the-weather-looks-risky/
  • Videos @lemmy.world

    Jason McBason - Men can't grasp what women are attracted to apparently

  • News @lemmy.world

    Mexico will ban foreign propaganda following the broadcast of Trump's anti-immigrant campaign in national media (Translation in body of post)

    elpais.com /mexico/2025-04-21/mexico-prohibira-la-propaganda-extranjera-tras-la-difusion-de-la-campana-antiinmigrante-de-trump-en-medios-nacionales.html
  • Microblog Memes @lemmy.world

    That 70s Glare

  • Science Memes @mander.xyz

    ∠🍵π

  • Microblog Memes @lemmy.world

    ∠🍵π

  • Microblog Memes @lemmy.world

    You must eat banana!

  • Videos @lemmy.world

    find404 - I Worked Out Like David Goggins for 100 Days