MAGAThread XX: A Journal of the Plague Year

[Nobel Hobos 2]

No, when they have engaged in fraud on a massive level since 2016, and are now claiming WE committed fraud, that's like listening to the boy who cried wolf. It's no longer credible with a huge part of the electorate.

It's not like they've all of a sudden stopped their fraud and relentless Trump hate, and become these good and honest people!

The Democrats are claiming that the election in 2016, while free and fair, was done with misleading or false information. No cheating involved.

Russians attempted to hack state counting servers. Which isn't cheating, if it didn't succeed, and also would have been detected with a recount from the county records.

Maybe Democrats should have thrown more lawyers at that, come to think of it. There was an electronic recount in a couple of the close states, iirc, but an electronic count isn't going to find anything if it's the electronic record that was tampered with.

[Albrenia]

All just the same denialism and gaslighting from you people. Honestly...

Coming from the person who said social media censorship and First Amendment violation was a good thing, you've destroyed your credibility to claim any honest concern for fair elections.

Businesses can ban who they like within legal limits, unless you're against the owners of such businesses have free speech, of course. Also never said it's a "good" thing, it just is what it is.

Also get new material, stop saying "gAsLiGhTiNg" like you're a nine year old who just learned a new swear.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

All just the same denialism and gaslighting from you people. Honestly...

Coming from the person who said social media censorship and First Amendment violation was a good thing, you've destroyed your credibility to claim any honest concern for fair elections.

Please don't include me in that. My arguments tend to be subtle, as I'm always trying for the angle no-one else has thought of. If it looks like gaslighting to you, you're not reading closely enough. Of course I may be wrong, but not deliberately so.

[Debate Proxy 1]

All just the same denialism and gaslighting from you people. Honestly...

Coming from the person who said social media censorship and First Amendment violation was a good thing, you've destroyed your credibility to claim any honest concern for fair elections.

What social media do you use?

This one only, in my case. I have been censored numerous times when I attempted to start threads on here, and people have seen it. I'm half-expecting an outright ban for all the times that certain moderators have threatened me.

When the thinnest fig-leaf of legality isn't present, my threads have even been locked without any explanatory post.

In this thread alone, I was even threatened for saying "Crooked Hillary"; what reasonable person would deny that she is, and that she's friends with a lot of other very crooked people?

Facebook's even worse at politicized moderation bias.

[Necroghastia]

All just the same denialism and gaslighting from you people. Honestly...

And the award for "most ironic statement in MAGAThread XX goes to...

Coming from the person who said social media censorship and First Amendment violation was a good thing, you've destroyed your credibility to claim any honest concern for fair elections.

Who is advocating First Amendment violations?

[Diarcesia]

What social media do you use?

In this thread alone, I was even threatened for saying "Crooked Hillary"; what reasonable person would deny that she is, and that she's friends with a lot of other very crooked people?

Mods have banned people for saying "Drumpf" as well. Common factor? Trying to get a rise out of their supporters.

[Albrenia]

All just the same denialism and gaslighting from you people. Honestly...

And the award for "most ironic statement in MAGAThread XX goes to...

Coming from the person who said social media censorship and First Amendment violation was a good thing, you've destroyed your credibility to claim any honest concern for fair elections.

Who is advocating First Amendment violations?

They mean me, when I pointed out that big businesses aren't the Democrats and so can ban whoever they choose. I never said it was a good thing, just that it is.

And as for saying political nicknames, it's literally against the rules, in the rules.

[Debate Proxy 1]

All just the same denialism and gaslighting from you people. Honestly...

Coming from the person who said social media censorship and First Amendment violation was a good thing, you've destroyed your credibility to claim any honest concern for fair elections.

Please don't include me in that. My arguments tend to be subtle, as I'm always trying for the angle no-one else has thought of. If it looks like gaslighting to you, you're not reading closely enough. Of course I may be wrong, but not deliberately so.

To be fair, sometimes you are reasonable. Partisan, yes, but I have at least been able to reason with you before in previous debates.

[Necroghastia]

What social media do you use?

This one only, in my case. I have been censored numerous times when I attempted to start threads on here, and people have seen it. I'm half-expecting an outright ban for all the times that certain moderators have threatened me.

When the thinnest fig-leaf of legality isn't present, my threads have even been locked without any explanatory post.

In this thread alone, I was even threatened for saying "Crooked Hillary"; what reasonable person would deny that she is, and that she's friends with a lot of other very crooked people?

Facebook's even worse at politicized moderation bias.

You were not "threatened," you got a warning. A slap on the wrist to say don't do that. The site has rules against political namecalling/nicknaming. Crooked Hillary is one example. Drumpf is another. The mods will come down on you for either, and you can't claim bias on that.

[Debate Proxy 1]

This one only, in my case. I have been censored numerous times when I attempted to start threads on here, and people have seen it. I'm half-expecting an outright ban for all the times that certain moderators have threatened me.

When the thinnest fig-leaf of legality isn't present, my threads have even been locked without any explanatory post.

In this thread alone, I was even threatened for saying "Crooked Hillary"; what reasonable person would deny that she is, and that she's friends with a lot of other very crooked people?

Facebook's even worse at politicized moderation bias.

You were not "threatened," you got a warning. A slap on the wrist to say don't do that. The site has rules against political namecalling/nicknaming. Crooked Hillary is one example. Drumpf is another. The mods will come down on you for either, and you can't claim bias on that.

You can even look at my posting history; a number of threads I started were locked without explanation in it. Sometimes I'm told "too long" when other people make equally long OPs on threads. I'm told "too short". When I have medium-size arguments, those get shut down too.

In one case, I was even told "warned for spamming moderation" when I was making an argument in defense of a couple posters who were banned, and suggesting to moderation that they consider changing policy.

[Kexholm Karelia]

I don’t disagree with that there’s 77 million Biden supporters

I've never approved of any KK posts more than these two!

"The votes don't lie".

And the implied "those insisting without evidence that the votes lie, must be lying"

The point is, despite the media censorship of conservatives, this election has shown there are 70 million of us at the very least, so it was more intended for Trump supporters here in that, if you ever feel like you’re surrounded by people hostile to your beliefs, remember that there are 70 million people who have your back

[Debate Proxy 1]

I've never approved of any KK posts more than these two!

"The votes don't lie".

And the implied "those insisting without evidence that the votes lie, must be lying"

The point is, despite the media censorship of conservatives, this election has shown there are 70 million of us at the very least, so it was more intended for Trump supporters here in that, if you ever feel like you’re surrounded by people hostile to your beliefs, remember that there are 70 million people who have your back

I bear this well in mind... and thanks again.

[Albrenia]

I've never approved of any KK posts more than these two!

"The votes don't lie".

And the implied "those insisting without evidence that the votes lie, must be lying"

The point is, despite the media censorship of conservatives, this election has shown there are 70 million of us at the very least, so it was more intended for Trump supporters here in that, if you ever feel like you’re surrounded by people hostile to your beliefs, remember that there are 70 million people who have your back

Well, he was elected President once, so it's pretty sure thing that it's not a fringe element that votes for him. As much as I might detest the man, he did get a hell of a lot of votes.

[Diarcesia]

You were not "threatened," you got a warning. A slap on the wrist to say don't do that. The site has rules against political namecalling/nicknaming. Crooked Hillary is one example. Drumpf is another. The mods will come down on you for either, and you can't claim bias on that.

You can even look at my posting history; a number of threads I started were locked without explanation in it. Sometimes I'm told "too long" when other people make equally long OPs on threads. I'm told "too short". When I have medium-size arguments, those get shut down too.

In one case, I was even told "warned for spamming moderation" when I was making an argument in defense of a couple posters who were banned, and suggesting to moderation that they consider changing policy.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=492674: Locked for copycatting similar types of threads. Saying it right in the OP didn't help.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=491247: Blog. Blogs get locked
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=492602: Are you willing to change your mind that Europe is not as bad as you think?

[Albrenia]

Also, unless one has information to do with the singular case at hand, posting in other people's reports or appeals is spamming moderation.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

The only "social media" which will ever allow you absolute Freedom of Speech would be so popular with advertising-spammers, DOS-spammers, hate speakers, doxxers, hackers, terrorists and pornographers of every vile sort imaginable.

If that sounds like heaven to you, go find it. But be aware that spending time in a place like that (getting content in your cache) may itself be illegal in your country. And there are cops there.

[Jerzylvania]

This one only, in my case. I have been censored numerous times when I attempted to start threads on here, and people have seen it. I'm half-expecting an outright ban for all the times that certain moderators have threatened me.

When the thinnest fig-leaf of legality isn't present, my threads have even been locked without any explanatory post.

In this thread alone, I was even threatened for saying "Crooked Hillary"; what reasonable person would deny that she is, and that she's friends with a lot of other very crooked people?

Facebook's even worse at politicized moderation bias.

You were not "threatened," you got a warning. A slap on the wrist to say don't do that. The site has rules against political namecalling/nicknaming. Crooked Hillary is one example. Drumpf is another. The mods will come down on you for either, and you can't claim bias on that.

Back in 2016, the renewing election thread of NSG was a madhouse. Way worse than this cycle. The mods were on the ball like leather back then too. IMHO they have an overall level of respectability most other sites don't achieve. Any bias is minimal.

[Debate Proxy 1]

You can even look at my posting history; a number of threads I started were locked without explanation in it. Sometimes I'm told "too long" when other people make equally long OPs on threads. I'm told "too short". When I have medium-size arguments, those get shut down too.

In one case, I was even told "warned for spamming moderation" when I was making an argument in defense of a couple posters who were banned, and suggesting to moderation that they consider changing policy.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=492674: Locked for copycatting similar types of threads. Saying it right in the OP didn't help.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=491247: Blog. Blogs get locked
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=492602: Are you willing to change your mind that Europe is not as bad as you think?

That's the thing. They just make up whenever something is "bloggy" or not. I was inviting ideas to public criticism, and similar length OPs by other people exist all over NS.

But it would be hard to convince me that Europe's not run like a hell-hole until Europeans stop threatening to tear apart my country, Balkanize it, and so forth. How is Europe different than Russia when both are opposed to Second Amendment rights, both interfere in our politics, one is full of oligarchs and the other full of aristocrats?

[Debate Proxy 1]

You were not "threatened," you got a warning. A slap on the wrist to say don't do that. The site has rules against political namecalling/nicknaming. Crooked Hillary is one example. Drumpf is another. The mods will come down on you for either, and you can't claim bias on that.

Back in 2016, the renewing election thread of NSG was a madhouse. Way worse than this cycle. The mods were on the ball like leather back then too. IMHO they have an overall level of respectability most other sites don't achieve. Any bias is minimal.

Not exactly "minimal", but it's still why I'm here rather than on FB.

[Jerzylvania]

Back in 2016, the renewing election thread of NSG was a madhouse. Way worse than this cycle. The mods were on the ball like leather back then too. IMHO they have an overall level of respectability most other sites don't achieve. Any bias is minimal.

Not exactly "minimal", but it's still why I'm here rather than on FB.

My perception is minimal versus other sites. Mileage may vary.

[Diarcesia]

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=492674: Locked for copycatting similar types of threads. Saying it right in the OP didn't help.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=491247: Blog. Blogs get locked
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=492602: Are you willing to change your mind that Europe is not as bad as you think?

That's the thing. They just make up whenever something is "bloggy" or not. I was inviting ideas to public criticism, and similar length OPs by other people exist all over NS.

But it would be hard to convince me that Europe's not run like a hell-hole until Europeans stop threatening to tear apart my country, Balkanize it, and so forth. How is Europe different than Russia when both are opposed to Second Amendment rights, both interfere in our politics, one is full of oligarchs and the other full of aristocrats?

Tip: Do you consider that it would be less "bloggy" if you asked a question, and then asked others what do they think? Many people would think it's cringe, but it won't get locked for being bloggy.

[Ifreann]

That the people get censored is clear evidence that even a child can see that Biden isn't the winner, and that that sea of signs is a truthful barometer in this case.

Indeed, it is in most cases, except in cities and states where there's long histories of systematic election fraud. Winning parties don't engage in censorship.

Take a break man. Go outside, watch a move, do something other than this.

Why stop when they're so successfully wasting so many people's time?

[Debate Proxy 1]

That's the thing. They just make up whenever something is "bloggy" or not. I was inviting ideas to public criticism, and similar length OPs by other people exist all over NS.

But it would be hard to convince me that Europe's not run like a hell-hole until Europeans stop threatening to tear apart my country, Balkanize it, and so forth. How is Europe different than Russia when both are opposed to Second Amendment rights, both interfere in our politics, one is full of oligarchs and the other full of aristocrats?

Tip: Do you consider that it would be less "bloggy" if you asked a question, and then asked others what do they think? Many people would think it's cringe, but it won't get locked for being bloggy.

Threads where I have asked questions like that, unfortunately, same thing happened.

[Kexholm Karelia]

The only "social media" which will ever allow you absolute Freedom of Speech would be so popular with advertising-spammers, DOS-spammers, hate speakers, doxxers, hackers, terrorists and pornographers of every vile sort imaginable.

If that sounds like heaven to you, go find it. But be aware that spending time in a place like that (getting content in your cache) may itself be illegal in your country. And there are cops there.

Social media censorship is like this

"I support Obama" - not banned

"I support Trump" - banned for hate speech or something

[The Black Forrest]

The only "social media" which will ever allow you absolute Freedom of Speech would be so popular with advertising-spammers, DOS-spammers, hate speakers, doxxers, hackers, terrorists and pornographers of every vile sort imaginable.

If that sounds like heaven to you, go find it. But be aware that spending time in a place like that (getting content in your cache) may itself be illegal in your country. And there are cops there.

Social media censorship is like this

"I support Obama" - not banned

"I support Trump" - banned for hate speech or something

Don’t be spreading lies. Nobody was banned for saying they support Trump. They got banned for violating the rules like going off on undesirables. Spouting hate, etc., etc., etc.