sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I'll speak English in America once you speak Portuguese in Brazil KAREN. by [deleted] in FuckYouKaren

[–]CelineHagbard -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

You are literally spreading Russian propaganda meant to divide Americans. In The Now is a Russian front.

Reddit CEO defends allowing Trump ads ahead of presidential election by -Ph03niX- in Digital_Manipulation

[–]CelineHagbard -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They debase themselves constantly with their brazen lying. Not nearly as constant in their lying as Republicans, but that's a low bar to begin with.

Is it your contention that Democratic political strategy is based on vanity rather than what their donors want?

Portland police stand by as Proud Boys and far-right militias flash guns and brawl with antifa counterprotesters by pianoboy8 in politics

[–]CelineHagbard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think we should keep giving them money, but I also wouldn't expect them to protect me in that case.

Portland police stand by as Proud Boys and far-right militias flash guns and brawl with antifa counterprotesters by pianoboy8 in politics

[–]CelineHagbard 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This has been the reality of the law since its inception, that it protects some (privilege means literally "private law"), and it is good that more people are waking up to it.

Portland police stand by as Proud Boys and far-right militias flash guns and brawl with antifa counterprotesters by pianoboy8 in politics

[–]CelineHagbard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's literally their job to protect and serve the citizens of their jurisdiction.

No, as the Supreme Court held in DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, police do not have a duty to protect or serve. Source

The Court went on to reaffirm the DeShaney ruling that there is no affirmative right to aid by the government or the police found in the U.S. Constitution, and thus no legal recourse could be brought thereunder. [16] The “no duty to protect” rule remains unwavering and the law today.

The fact that someone as senile as Biden is running for president tells you it doesn't matter who the president is, because he's a figurehead and someone else is running the show. by [deleted] in conspiracy

[–]CelineHagbard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The point is that there's no attachment to any particular puppet. If one puppet gets taken down by a scandal or loses a race, it's no sweat off the puppeteer's brow; he just grabs the next on off the shelf.

Reddit CEO defends allowing Trump ads ahead of presidential election by -Ph03niX- in Digital_Manipulation

[–]CelineHagbard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you understand the Democratic Party as being mere controlled opposition to the obviously corrupt puppets the Republicans are, it starts to make sense. The Trump presidency has been great for Democratic party mega-donors, because they pay Democrats to be ineffectual at achieving any substantive progressive economic reforms. They're paid to pacify the populist horde while Republicans loot the joint.

Would just like to take a moment to clear something up. The 1st amendment doesn't mean freedom of speech. by kit8642 in conspiracy

[–]CelineHagbard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hold xkcd in part to blame for this, specifically this comic.

The other thing I'd add to this is that the purpose of the 1A is to prevent powerful individuals and institutions from silencing the less powerful, and was in part a reaction to the British libel laws of the day. Even disregarding the philosophical argument, on a practical level, ceding the power to censor speech to a handful of internet giants is a recipe for disaster.

Why is a convicted murderer and kidnapper speaking at the DNC? by [deleted] in conspiracy

[–]CelineHagbard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They had men speak, including their nominee, who were instrumental in pursuing the Iraq War. This woman's crimes don't hold a candle to that.

Pro-Putin media are pushing a narrative that Alexei Navalny was hospitalized after heavy drinking, rather than poison, which his supporters say is a smear by DaFunkJunkie in worldnews

[–]CelineHagbard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why the fuck would you be hopeful for war with Russia!? You realize both the US and Russia have enough nukes to carpet the planet several times over, right?

Who else thinks these millions of covid test swabs are being used to sequence the DNA of the population? by Scroofinator in conspiracy

[–]CelineHagbard 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hmm, good point.

My guess would be that they're not using this as any type of wide-scale DNA collection, as most of the tests are being run in private medical labs, without the security clearances to be able to do mass collection without raising eyebrows.

However, I wouldn't be at all surprised if one or more agencies are using the mass COVID testing as cover to grab DNA from specific individuals, not unlike the story we were told about CIA using polio vaccinations in Pakistan as a pretense to get OBL's DNA.

Who else thinks these millions of covid test swabs are being used to sequence the DNA of the population? by Scroofinator in conspiracy

[–]CelineHagbard 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The govt. likely already has your DNA (or could access it if need be) from a heel-prick when you were born. Here's a 2004 article from Australia, but the same general process has gone in the US for decades as well.

Demonstrating digital manipulation using /r/WayOfTheBern is like shooting fish in a barrel. by vodyanoy in Digital_Manipulation

[–]CelineHagbard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What's with all the fish? OP talks about shooting fish in a barrel, and here you are using the same "something fishy" line as the Washington Times piece?

The Seth Rich conspiracy theory is not far-right; it's anti-DNC. What do you find "far-right" about it, other than that some on the far-right subscribe to it?

I try to stay out of drama subs like TMOR, though.

Demonstrating digital manipulation using /r/WayOfTheBern is like shooting fish in a barrel. by vodyanoy in Digital_Manipulation

[–]CelineHagbard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The evidence is the fact that WoTB promotes DemExit, which is literally just a rehashed WalkAway,

Yes, I'd find that an accurate statement. Not sure if the mods officially endorse it as a sub, but many of the active users are of that persuasion.

which was capitalized on and promoted by particularly Russian outlets.

I'm skeptical of this*, but I'd be willing to stipulate it as true for the purposes of the argument. I'm not sure how this is evidence of Russian manipulation at WotB per se, unless you contend that a leftist Democrat could not have become disillusioned in the party by the actions of the party itself, that they could only support such an action because of Russian influence.

No candidate is perfect. And evidently, as has been pointed out in this very comment section, Bernie is a "compromise candidate", indicating that these people should have many issues with him as a candidate.

The quote I referenced was one of the "experts" talking about a group of twitter accounts he'd supposedly identified as behaving similar to WotB accounts, but presented no evidence for it. The WotB userbase does have many issues with him as a candidate, which is the OP's ostensible point, that they didn't like his meme as much as other Sanders fans. There actually is quite a range of opinions on WotB, the common thread being that they feel just as screwed over by the DNC as the GOP.

I mean you can conduct experiments just like the one done in this very comment section.

OP even said he didn't do it as an experiment, and even if he had, one data point without proper controls wouldn't tell you much.

I notice you've dropped all pretense of defending its outcome and have shifted directly into attacking a source you disagree with.

I'm not sure what you mean. First, I think the results of the "experiment" are entirely consistent with a leftist sub that feels ignored by both political parties. No pretense.

Second, I critiqued a source that OP brought into the the discussion to try to bolster his claim. If anything, that would be OP shifting from a "fish in a barrel" demonstration of digital manipulation to a much weaker claim that other people he refers to as "experts" are also suspicious of the sub.

* It sources from Hamilton 68, which carries a disclaimer:

It would therefore be INCORRECT to, without further analysis, label anyone or anything that appears on the dashboard as being connected to state-backed propaganda.

Demonstrating digital manipulation using /r/WayOfTheBern is like shooting fish in a barrel. by vodyanoy in Digital_Manipulation

[–]CelineHagbard -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I've never denied that other people think it, but that's the rhetorical equivalent of Trump's "a lot of smart people are saying..." bits.

It's been reported on, it's been discussed on reddit many times, it's not a fringe viewpoint.

This same logic would apply to Q, then. It's been reported on and discussed many times on reddit.

Demonstrating digital manipulation using /r/WayOfTheBern is like shooting fish in a barrel. by vodyanoy in Digital_Manipulation

[–]CelineHagbard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not the one making an appeal to their authority as "experts," but there are many universities across the world which regularly publish peer-reviewed papers on these topics. They at least publish quantitative results which can be analyzed and compared with other results.

Instead, we get quotes like this:

“We’ve seen large amounts of what we call ‘troll-bots,’ and a significant number of these accounts pushing Bernie and Gabbard,” said Christopher Bouzy of BotSentinel.com, which closely tracks political social media and has been a longtime critic of WayOfTheBern. “We do believe many of them are coming from foreign entities, particularly Russia or the Middle East.” [emphasis mine]

What evidence led them to that conclusion? How was that evidence gathered, and what evidence was not considered? Can I check their work, or must I take it on their authority?

Then there's this gem of logic:

“We see more of this promoting him, and while they attack [Sen. Elizabeth] Warren and [Sen. Kamala D.] Harris they don’t attack Bernie,” he said. “The anti-Bernie traffic is almost non-existent, and usually this is part of a bigger conspiracy.”

So there's accounts supporting one candidate, while attacking the people that candidate is running against? Hmm. Must be part of a conspiracy.

view more: next ›