this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2025
88 points (95.8% liked)
Slop.
753 readers
438 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Have you actually read it, and if so, what are your actual thoughts on it? If it is genuinely the "worst drivel ever written" it should be easy to show us all why that is.
And even if we don't listen to you, at least passive observers in this thread will be able to see you making cogent and interesting arguments and think your position has merit. Declaring something is bad while also showing that you don't seem to have actually read it just makes you come across to people as smug and ignorant. And saying "no u" when called out on this just makes you look worse, don't you want to put us dumb tankies in our place by showing us that you know what you're talking about and we don't?
I will just refer you to my other comment: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/23476457
Ok, since you aren't interested in debate, we don't need to do anything like that. That's fine, I don't really want to debate this topic either.
It is a shame that when I ask about your thoughts about this work, your response is to provide someone else's thoughts on it. You're really not beating any allegations that you haven't actually read it and that you aren't just hating on it because others have told you to do so.
Seriously, it's extremely short. It's barely over a thousand words. If you've read through this entire comment thread you've probably read more than this entire work. I'm not asking you to agree with me or make any sort of big life change or anything, but please, just read it and form your own opinions, you don't need to share them if you don't want to, but I do want you to think for yourself and make up your own mind. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
EDIT: Holy shit, this guy actually ran away to his own instance to cry about the evil tankies talking about a fucking thousand word pamphlet he's too scared to read and form his own opinion on. I think this might actually be the most pathetic loser on the fedverse. Also I recognise them now, they're the same loser who loves abusing the idea of disengaging when they realise they're showing their whole ass in a discussion. So not just a loser, but also toxic and abusing a system designed to help people with triggers and mental health issues too!
It's very funny and on brand that that loser is strutting around in the instance they ban all dissent in proclaiming how much they owned you, where as here where the actual discussion happened they instantly had to resort to abusing the disengage rule. What more can you expect from an "anarchist" that regularly defends outright Nazis.
Usually the outcome when they can't lock threads not going the direction they want because too many rule breaking comments
/disengage
Is this the cringe mantra you repeat while sticking your fingers in your ears?
That's a rule from your own instance you should probably respect
Except you aren't following correctly either
Any user may disengage from any discussion by posting a two word, and only two word, reply: "I'm Disengaging". Stipulations:
Sorry what part did I not follow correctly? That I said "disengage" and not "I'm disengaging"? In any case this wasn't how it was phrased in the past.
And in other areas doing it as end of a reply that could be taken as an attack/making fun of them.
Where did I vague post about or bring up damascusart later?
It's not just this one user you've done it on
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/23481626
Ah, nice goalpost moving. Probably double-checked and realized your initial gotcha didn't work.
Anyway, that's our instance. That doesn't have the same disengage rules as yours. Leaving a neutral comment along with the disengage isn't against our rules.
Says the one who didn't know the hexbear disengage rules.
That wasn't a neutral comment but you love to do that when it's in your favor
Says the one who correctly used the disengage rule in hexbear, while those multiple hexbears blatantly disrespecting it (again, in hexbear) don't get any trouble, which is typical hypocrisy for hexbears and their cliquish shite.
Looks like I was right on the money on the failed "gotcha" too
Agree to disagree. I left it as a lighthearted "I don't understand wtf you're on about". And it's not like I banned someone from replying to that disengage either.