According to the people I know, “It’s better” because they won the browser speed race without looking at anything else.

As my professor used to say, nothing is obvious. What’s obvious to you is not to someone else and vice versa.

Removed by mod

That’s a better definition!

That’s the same definition I’ve been using all along. You just wanted it to be written a certain way because you listened to the other guy and got some ideas. That’s been literally my entire point and I think I’ve said it three different ways.

But also don’t exaggerate a "regime"1

Literally the counterpoint to what I was replying to. See? You guys are rehashing everything that has been said all along. You two think I have this other worldview different than yours or something, and you’re trying to fish me out to be the bad guy without realizing we’re talking about the same damn thing from different angles, yet agree on the core principle. Is that clear now? Am I free to go?

What your are calling “details” and “minutia” are attempts

…to not get bogged down in useless definitions that turn out to rehash everything that has been said already? Can we not be practical about it? Must it be a conspiracy? If you’d listened the first time, we wouldn’t be here still.

Oh shit, you got me. Maybe stop giving importance to such low-hanging bullshit. How about that? Between the one who makes it and the one who consumes it with their mouth wide open, I know who I’d rather be in this scenario.

Eh, I knew you were gonna come up with some low-hanging bullshit.

circulating lies and propaganda about the people we’re told to hate

Oh yeah? Quote me. Specify the targeted people and what I said about them. You got one chance.

But that’s literally what you did. Cope.

Ex dee, dude. And I can cite an entire conversation of you misreading into a comment and running with it like a chicken with its head cut off. Then dropping a quiz inside a word salad, all the while being perfectly obnoxious about it. How’s that for citing shit from this thread?

Whatever pretense you had about rigor, it just went out the window.

And you say that because you’ve clearly read my entire comment history and have reached a sound conclusion based on clear evidence that you can cite, right? Totally not being hypocritical, overreaching, dramatic, rude, and a little bit desperate to make one final jab, huh.

only “accidentally falling into the trap” of supporting Bill Gates

It’s like I say things and they don’t even register. I’m so done with you trying to pull shit shit by arguing in bad faith and rehashing what was already said. I’ve been consistent in my answers and now you’re doing some other shit. I can’t with you Lemmings sometimes.

If you need clarification, I probably already gave it and you took it some other way. Go have fun with someone else.

Yes, because you were perfectly happy/capable of giving one before:

That’s a guiding principle at best, bud.

perfectly happy/capable
Having a stronger/more rigorous definition would help you with communicating your ideas […]

Cut the sass and the condescending tone.

including a certain ‘argumentative gremlin’, to perceive that as meaning “so long as it doesn’t contradict my existing worldview”.

And that is not my problem if I’ve already clarified but you two are too hung up on details rather than substance and running off on ridiculous tangents. You can take it or leave it and I don’t care either way. I’m done with this pedantic argument over definitions over minutia that I really dgaf about.

So all this bull aside, and I’ll reiterate to cover my bases, my overarching point is: Don’t underplay a regime and make them seem more reasonable than they are by whitewashing history, whether intentionally or not. Sorry if you need further clarification, but I find that self-evident.

Have a good one.

The bunch of sheletered idiot worry about their little games

This you?

It takes huge balls to go around calling people stupid only to miss the entire point yourself. Terrible troll, honestly.

Your reply doesn’t really follow the conversation. This is tangential to the main thread. We’re talking about how we present and defend information as a meta commentary on these threads, and not how the egging on of an invasion of a totalitarian country upsets some folks.

Also, did you just make an account to participate in this thread? Your account is brand spankin’.

“I should be able to say whatever I want about this country, true or not, and if people push back, they’re accidentally licking boots”

Who is saying that?? 😅 If you in the process of clarifying something start overreaching in the wrong direction, you’re giving them leeway they don’t deserve. It’s simple, dude. I’ve seen it happen with people denying and downplaying horrible shit. Just like you want people to not overstate their actions, I don’t want people understating them either as I’ve seen some people do, on purpose (or not), or as I put it, “accidentally [… unless?]” That’s the tongue-in-cheek part because, precisely, how do you accidentally do it? There might be intent behind it, we don’t know. We are in the middle of an information trying to push people a certain way and these corners of the internet are quite happy with playing for Russia & friends.

That’s the whole reason I’m telling you that I agree with you and that we’re fucking splitting hairs by coming at it from opposite sides.

Loved the absurd tangent though, but I guess we need laser focus and surgical precision when it’s my turn to answer, huh.

As it comes up? Idk. What, am I supposed to give a monolithic answer now for speaking broadly? I’ve had .ml accounts actively deny the severity of historical events in their efforts to whitewash history. “Oh, it wasn’t that bad.” Oh, really? Sounds a bit sus.

This is not a gotcha just because you’re listening to the other fool.

I’m sorry, but Objection has taken the wrong idea and run with it. If you think they’re making a great point, I’d suggest you reread with what I’ve said in mind. I do own that I’m a little hasty to judge .ml accounts from experience, but that’s about it. The rest is Objection assuming things with extra dressing to frame the conversation.

Tbh, I don’t even know what the fuck they’re arguing about now, and I can’t be bothered. Seriously, go take a look a that word salad and the embedded quiz of them just being an extra little argumentative gremlin.

What the fuck are you on about, Jessie?

The “trap” of correctly refuting misinformation? How generous of you!

Listen, if you’re going to be this disrespectfully disingenuous, I’d rather you stop right now because you’re already getting into the realm of obnoxious and condescending.

And in this case, you replied to someone with .ml saying “why do .ml’s…” and “y’all…” You were clearly including them

I think I very much addressed that in two different points to be rehashing this.

Because of… the truth? Does being a “known violator of human rights” make it ok for people to spread lies?

You’re saying the same thing I’ve expressed but from a different angle. We’re almost down to splitting hairs, except that you’re taking my words to an extreme. Did I or did I not add the tongue-in-cheek qualifier “accidentally” to licking boots to signify the benefit of the doubt of the people falling into this trap?

If North Korea is my “enemy,” it’s certainly a very small and distant one that’s not really worth messing with.

Not so distant if we’re going to be fighting a proxy war against them. If you think they’re a remote country not participating in world affairs, then I’ve got recent news for you.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/12/north-koreas-kim-voices-unconditional-support-for-russia-in-ukraine
https://www.npr.org/2025/06/16/g-s1-71531/north-korea-soldiers-russia-ukraine-war-drones

I think you’re connecting two things in my mind that were completely separate, and are using that as a springboard to jump to conclusions about my supposed standards based on one flawed premise, then about me uncritically accepting things, and also that I’m explicitly against US enemies. Brother, I’m not even American. Can I not talk about a pitfall that I often see with people defending NK, as an “inb4” if you will? Because I hope you reread the sentence that way.

If anything, my only direct comment about the person I’m replying to was the first question: Why so eager to jump in like that about a known violator of human rights that has voiced unconditional support for Russia, a country actively picking a fight with the entire West side of the world? A tyrannic, totalitarian regime is everybody’s enemy as far as I’m concerned.

But sure, maybe I’m reading the other person wrong too, and I’m unnecessarily assigning blame because of my previous experience with this exact same topic with other .ml accounts behaving that way and swarming the person commenting.