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, just like that.
What do you expect? I said I'm maybe interested in discussing complex topics. You replied with how I "come across" to you. That is a feeling. It is not an objective, rational or measurable thing. It is unique to you and people that are similar to you, experiencing a similar situation.
Cool bro. That's how you feel. I'm not too interested in feelings though, otherwise I wouldn't have come out with a first reply disagreeing with some dude.
Yeah bud, just the hugest brain on you. Us peasants with "feelings" can't comprehend you when you quite obviously misunderstand basic English sentences.
If you got something other than a feeling in response to this, I'm all ears:
He said things don't change. Progressives try to change things. If progressives want to change things and he's saying things don't change, he's saying progressives must always fail.
True or false?
They literally did not.
In this situation, they don't expect a change.
As I, and everyone else, have been saying: You are tilting at windmills.
Right, I got that wrong last time too. Allow me to revise.
They said "things will not change". If progressives want things to change, but things will not change, then they are saying the progressives must fail.
True or false?
edit: If anyone actually got this far, I think this thread was raided by conservatives pretending to be liberals. That actually happens a fair bit, though not usually in places this small. They're just bored people hanging out on the internet somewhere, and someone makes a post going "hey guys, let's all go fuck with link". Used to happen all the time at 4chan, probably still does. And there's discords and shit that can coordinate crap like this when they're in the mood.
Could also be properly organized shills, but I'd think they'd have better places to be.
... what are you even on about?
They don't expect a change in this case. You're trying really hard to stretch those words into something entirely different.
C'mon now. Be serious.
I can't find any other explanation for the sheer amount of trolliness I'm receiving. A bunch of people elsewhere are trying to pretend I'm defending Murdoch somehow.
What the person I was replying to said, was a hopeless perspective that you consistently hear. It does nothing but de-motivate people. They could have said "Fox" will not change. But I'm real sick of hearing that things will not change when they very, very clearly will. Will Fox improve in the short-term? No, of course not. Will Fox News eventually change? It would be impossible not to.
Saying "things will not change", under virtually any circumstances, is objectively false, actively harmful and completely pointless. My apologies for hating it, but I won't back down from this position.
Have you tried looking inward?
Hell you don't even have to look inwards. I told you right here in this thread why people are taking issue with you. It was actually meant to be constructive. But you dismissed it as "feelings".
I didn't really see anything constructive or that I could use in it. I can't control how other people see me, and I can't predict how my words will be received. All I know is those four words were wrong. At every level. So I called it out, and I said why I felt that way.
Predicting how your words will be received by an audience is a core skill in communication, and one that can be practiced.
Constructive enough for you?
This is the internet, mistakes in communication are extremely frequent due to nonverbal cues all being missing. I can tell you with certainty that I was expecting that to be fairly controversial, but also to be overall upvoted as opposed to down-voted. I'm actually pretty fucking disappointed people aren't understanding what I'm trying to say, because it's pretty important. Hence why I suspect a raid.
Folks around here are usually more willing to engage with nuance and a calm, polite analysis of the specifics of something.
Nobody has raided anything. Your comments have consistently accused others of holding extreme positions, when they simply haven't. You are arguing with positions that don't exist. And when that has been pointed out to you, you have doubled down on your misinterpretation. All while stroking your ego about how intelligent you think you are.
It's a little sad that you think only "intelligent" people can want a rational conversation. What if I was just autistic and took words really literally? Should I just stfu or something?
Either we got raided, or our demographics shifted rapidly in the shitpost direction in the past short while or something.
I haven't said anything of the sort.
Then my blunt feedback to you likely would have been more easily received.
You really are incapable of accepting that you're the one at fault here, huh?
I never said I was intelligent. Why do you keep saying it then?
No, at least until I get something that makes some rational sense, I said in no uncertain terms. I will not back down from this position. Work on your reading comprehension.
Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it irrational.
Oh the irony of this from someone who consistently misinterprets everyone else.
I've yet to get anything but opinions and feelings from you. That is not rational sense, we do not look to our feelings for rational sense. Unless you can find where you tried to be objective and rational and I missed it?
You'll find the answers you're looking for when you stop dismissing things you don't like to hear as "feelings".
What is objective vs what is subjective is not a matter of me liking it. It's a set of rules you learn in school that forces you to follow them if you want to consistently "make sense".
When something "seems" a certain way, that is not an objective thing. It can "seem" different to different people. This is a subjective feeling.
I hope you one day come to terms with how people, and communication, works...
If it makes me like everyone else in this thread, I really fucking hope I never do.
There's that smugness again.
Even 4channers know what shitposts are. Bad shitposters, bad!
Except there are none here.
Right. This whole thread, none, not one. Not even me. Not even that 100% false 5 word sentence you just wrote.
Fair, I did think you were a troll. But now I kinda think you just lack introspection.
Funny you call me the troll, but you're also throwing out insults left and right. Not exactly high quality comments, right? You'll note I've given up putting much effort in too, but I think I've made my point.
Eh well. I tried. Believe whatever you want, bud.
Third time's the charm: I will not back down from this position. In case you didn't notice, I feel really strongly about this one.
You do that then.
Thanks for your permission, it means a lot to me.