this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
570 points (96.3% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3541 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

i think your comment was removed because you used an insult

you disingenuous fuck.

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah maybe. Still stand behind that statement. Insults are useful for people arguing in bad faith, those people should always be shouted down.

[–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith.

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Entering an argument in good faith with someone who obviously is arguing in bad faith is pointless. The biggest problem is often that those who make bad faith arguments don't know they are doing so. Instead they lean into semantics to justify making bad faith arguments. Then start doing the "no u" thing before they start whining.

I choose to yell first because it triggers these types of defensive responses they would do anyways at the end of a good faith discussion. Kind of like splashing the antichrist with holy water so we can just know who they are.

[–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

those who make bad faith arguments don't know they are doing so.

then it's not bad faith. in order to be operating in bad faith, you must be choosing to use intellectually dishonest rhetoric. what youre describing is just amateurs.

[–] pahlimur@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Huh you know what, your right. Is there a word for purposely derailing a discussion by bringing up unrelated information? I guess it would be misleading, maybe?

[–] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

people do derail and use red herrings, but I think most of them don't even realize it unless someone calls it out.