I believe that, in which case “that’s not from Trump” is something they’re in no position to say matter-of-factly; they’re just guessing (and I think poorly, at that). It’s just palm-reading the post and then giving a definitive, with no caveats, “Nope, Trump didn’t write this.”

I linked to the article because trying to definitively say Trump didn’t write something definitionally has to be reserved for fake posts, not real ones that come from his account with no disclaimer and no later admission.

Sure, and if you want to argue “a staffer did it”, then “staying on point”/“generally cohesive” is a stretch to make the argument work. This has extremely jumpy flow, and trying to move the standard further back and say “bUt NoT fOr TrUmP” just turns this whole thing into an unfalsifiable hypothesis facilitated by an infinitely movable goalpost. I can point out why it’s so jumpy (any literate person should be able to), but I’m confident it’ll be met with, again, “tRuMp StAnDaRdS tHo!!”.

Edit: More importantly, though, saying confidently that “it’s not from Trump” is hilariously unfounded. I’m not arguing it is or is not from Trump, but rather that saying anything definitively like that is absurd.

Rosechu has no connections to 4-cent_garbage.com, so quit asking.

You say that with such effortless confidence without even having bothered to check, and not one of those 10 people who upvoted tried to check either. golf clap

Just wanted to cut through the bullshit and remind myself that when they said I think “all sides bad and ignore geopolitical context”, they were definitely also referring to among the most reprehensible authoritarian regimes on Earth that they support.

Like it’s some ridiculous, hand-wavey stance to think the US and North Korea (and obviously Iran, but that doesn’t fully illustrate how depraved their worldview is) are simultaneously bad.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Sounds a lot like: “We broadly support North Korea, but that’s too embarrassing to say directly, so we’ll just shitpost about it like a neo-Nazi would when asked a direct question about their abhorrent beliefs – afraid of frightening away the normies by revealing their ‘power level’.”

It’s comforting to me that you have to carry the level of shame that your beliefs are unspeakable in spaces dominated by sane people – and are barely even speakable in this deranged hellhole for fear that your monstrous beliefs will surface above the irony poisoning and scare away the few people with functioning consciences who stumbled into this from the front page.

Quick username question: opinions on North Korea? Since we’re on the whole “shitty ethics” thing.

Not even a little surprised that tankies – the fucking cognoscenti of rhetoric that pretends to care about a bad thing, masking that the real goal is for “their side” to have a monopoly on the bad thing – lack consistent ethics when it comes to destroying the planet and flooding out human-made media for shitty, braindead, dubiously effective propaganda.

copy–pasted the words into the text editor Kate

you […] pasted them into a word count website

QED

counted

Correction: copy–pasted the words into the text editor Kate in five seconds.

And sure I could’ve guessed, but I wanted to rub in exactly how stupid and self-owning your insult was.

For all this big talk about “maybe you should get off the Internet”, you sure do fucking suck when it actually comes to conceiving of a way to find basic information.

The comment I was replying to was 89 words. I wrote 116 and only used your quotes to establish what I was replying to. If you consider 116 words a wall of text worthy of ridicule, then I think you’re projecting about who the illiterate morons who shouldn’t be on the Internet are here. You should get off the Internet and pay attention; Mr. Winkler is trying to teach you and the other 4th-graders how to use context clues and what the three-syllable word “demanding” means.

If you can’t look at that source, read it for 5 seconds and realize it’s a shithole rag of disinformation and conspiracy theories

Those people are only going to improve their media literacy when they can compare and contrast what good and bad sources look like – whether they do that on their own or with help from someone else. While that muscle is still underdeveloped in so many people, is it obscene to you to just help them a little?

If you can’t find another source on the same information by using your thumbs

Centralizing the information means less wasted work. I’d bet I can do the research you can do in an hour in ten minutes, and my actual decade-long hobby is making research easier for others; I don’t need this lecture.

demanding a better bibliography.

“Demanding” is when you just do the thing yourself immediately and unprompted without asking anything from anybody.

Then why did you comment?

Because the OP shared a bad source, some people might want to read about this event (I did, which is why I read this), and this is the original source and open-access. Like goddamn; did the submarine disappear because it went up your ass?

TIL .ml loves mass-spam of genAI slopaganda if it’s in support of a cause they’re aligned with. Good to know.

Earth.com is, in my experience, ridiculously clickbaity and sensationalist. The open-access article recounting this (that the OP article just regurgitates) is here. (I know this is a memes community; don’t @ me.)

Could’ve at least saved it for a little foreskin calamari is all.

New business idea: fortune cookie text but on tampon wrappers.