News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, Kirk’s own political rhetoric was pretty extreme and violent.
Not as violent or extreme as the groypers who killed him for not being violent and extreme enough tho...
Did I miss credible evidence coming out that he was a groyper?
Last I heard that theory had been retracted because it was based on a misidentification of the markings on the shell casings.
Yes, you did
And if you ask someone else politely they might even take the two seconds to type it into a search engine for you.
Best of luck!
In the ranking of helpfulness of comments:
-Providing a source
-Providing an explanation
-Just not commenting at all
-Making a snarky reply that contains no useful info and tells people to look things up themselves.
You mean like this article?
Why People Fell for an Outlandish Charlie Kirk Theory
Oh...
So I was right, you can use a search engine, you're just JAQing off...
That article says he's not because... They actually don't give a reason, just call the idea stupid.
Check out their other articles:
https://www.theatlantic.com/author/graeme-wood/
They're pro-israel, worried about the "plight" of white south Africans, and call Kirk getting shot "one of the worst moments in American history"...
But they agree with you, that's all that matters, right?
Otherwise you'd have linked something that shows evidence, instead of just calling it "stupid".
But I'm sure as shit never wasting time on you JAQing off again
How can I link to something that shows evidence that doesn't exist?
You're more than welcome to provide a source to counter mine instead of moving the goalposts, though.
Do you know what the word "evidence" means?
Always gotta assume they're your enemy. Because why be any other way on the Internet? It's just helpful!
He basically killed himself
I mean yeah, there's no question that extremist rhetoric got him killed. and yeah I'd have to say it's far more of his own style of it. The part that baffles me is how it's only 60%, unless they somehow posed it as rhetoric against him. To me that question is as basic as saying "did gun violence have anything to do with his death?", uhh yeah.
I have feeling the question is vaguely worded so that they can then try and tear it to say "is it people saying he supports facism the reason for the violence". So that they can push to criminalize describing reality and pointing out real problems, because some people might try to solve problems with violence.
You do realize that if you click the headline it takes you to an actual article with more details?
Like, you could have read the article and gotten answers to your questions instead of typing out all those assumptions and hoping someone answers.
And I would copy/paste most of the time, but really people need to just learn to read the fucking articles.
and got killed by someone more extreme than he is.