you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 2 years ago* (7 children)

This isn’t the coup de grace you think it is.

I just thought it was funny.

I’m not claiming any specific intent behind your statements.

It's just that both-siding requires intent. You wouldn't be both-sideing without it, it would just be a statement mentioning both sides.

I'm sorry but this has gone to a stupid degree. You misunderstood what I said as both-siding, I explained multiple times it wasn't that, honestly time to give this a rest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (6 children)

    I pointed out that your argument was so reductive as to amount to both-siding. I’m glad it wasn’t your intent, but it’s a shame that you don’t see the problem with that regardless.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Election denialism seems to just now be a feature of American politics

    But both sides aren't doing it equally!!! How dare you claim so!

    I didn't.

    Should've been the end of it, really.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (4 children)

    You really can’t address the argument I made, can you?

    Your comment was so reductive as to be indistinguishable from bad faith equivalency. The claim that you didn’t mean to speaks only to your naivety.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    The whole discussion has been you attacking a position I never had and now venting how I caused you to misunderstand. I'm sorry you're upset but this discussion serves no purpose anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments