BTW, you posted the link with the youtube trackers still attached. Everything from the ‘?si=’ onward can be deleted while still directly linking to the video.

That’s not doing facial recognition though, that’s a reverse image lookup. It’s a lot easier to find an exact match for a photo.

Oh Jesus. Jon Tester’s campaign texted me yesterday asking for money. I dont even know how I got added to his list but knowing he voted against raising the minimum wage makes me infuriated he would text someone outside his district for help.

He can go kick rocks. I’m trying to help you.

From an outsider perspective, it looks like you told him to “go respond to this guy instead”, but linked the same comment that it was already responding to. It was confusing and made you look like the asshole in the situation, which I’m trying to help prevent in the future.

Oof. Nevermind, then. Tried to show you why being an asshole about it might have backfired, but keep being jaded!

Apparently the way Lemmy’s link creation works makes all first-level replies to your comment the same link AS your comment. So, in providing the link ‘to be helpful’, you only linked to your own comment. That’s not actually helpful and so it doesn’t come across in the best way.

About a year after it came out, I was singing along with it during a depressive episode and realized ‘seven’ wasn’t accurate anymore. It freaked me out, but I realized that part of the nature of the song is the impending doom, and I have to change the lyrics when I get to that part.

…Four more to go.

Yeah my Mum has it and has to have her shirt tucked in her pants as the buttons often contain nickel.

Ugh, same, but there’s a trick - Clear fingernail polish! It will eventually rub away, but it’s worth it so you don’t have to worry in the meantime.

This is an image of Mark Barden, not Alex Jones, BTW. His son was killed during Sandy Hook.

As someone who used to work with creating DLC codes for code-in-box pack-ins, I’m SHOCKED this doesn’t happen more often. Sometimes it’s as simple as a checkbox in a submenu in a submenu of the submission information of a title not matching a different checkbox, especially when you start adding in combos of ‘deluxe editions’.

They’re not really being “generous” by allowing people who already redeemed the code to keep it, it’s just WAY too much of a hassle to remove and re-do those codes for specific people. It’s much easier to just nuke ALL the codes and send out new ones.

It’s a contact allergy, so mostly it just makes you break out in a rash if you wear jewelry or work with tools that have been plated in nickel. It takes time before you break out, although people instantly falling over after getting a handful of change would be hilarious to see.

I’d imagine they include their off-hours in the ‘averages’.

“So crazy that we’re getting more calls when we’re open than when we’re closed!”

You misunderstand my point. Let me explain again.

I don’t care if they’re being genuine or not and don’t feel a need to prove it one way or the other. I will treat anyone who is defending Nazis as if they are genuinely Nazis themselves because at the end of the day, that’s what they’re pushing for, intentionally or not.

The damage this can cause does not change if it was intentional or not, so our reaction to it should not change either.

Their initial comment was complete nonsense, and sarcastic derision is one of the few things that actually upsets people like that who ignore the content of the conversation while also pretending to have the moral high ground. Their point is often to get people arguing amongst themselves instead of realizing they just shifted the conversation from “Here is a Nazi in Indiana” to “You can’t prove that Chinese speakers aren’t Nazis.” (Like we’re doing now.)

What would you have called them out for that fits better than moving goalposts or a strawman argument?

You admit that they were running interference for a nazi, but also want to give them the benefit of the doubt? Historians have a word for people who didn’t agree fully with, but still defended nazis. Want to know what they were called?

Nazis.

If you’re aligning yourself with them, running interference for them, I’m going to treat you as if it is intentional because the effect is the exact same. If it was an accident, there were plenty of opportunities to change opinions and apologize. That hasn’t happened, so all evidence we have points to the person defending Nazis being disingenuous here.

You have to make assumptions on people’s motivations either way. I’m just more willing to base my assumptions on how genuine someone is being whether or not they are running interference for Nazis.

I think you should be cautious of just how much faith you’re putting into this person.

They said they’d agree

They didn’t. They only gave reasons to not agree. They implied that they would agree if that condition was met, but that’s not what they said.

they accepted that the person who owns the car is a Nazi

Again, they didn’t. They said, “I missed that,.my bad.” They didn’t change anything about their argument from this information (that was always available to them), just acknowledged that they didn’t use it.

Maybe I should’ve called their argument a strawman argument instead, but the discrepancy between what they say OP can call a Nazi and what they can call a Nazi feels wide enough to change the rules of the debate for each side.

The goalposts to being a nazi got moved farther back because “we can’t know their intent from just this license plate” and then 2 seconds later, the goalposts for being a nazi was moved way forward because “everyone who says good luck in Chinese is a Nazi.”

Yes, that’s literally moving the goalposts on what defines a Nazi.

Why? You ignore content anyway.

Your back must hurt from moving all those goalposts.

“Give me your entire life and I’ll give you rewards beyond your wildest dreams… that you can only see after you die.”

One of the greatest grifts in all of history.