I agree with you. I think it's a bot and thus should be banned, as per the rules.

Just block and move on is okay for trolls and sock puppets. I don't think that's a good strategy for bots. You don't see them any more but they keep posting using bandwidth. They're building up a profile with engagement that will make it harder to get banned down the line when they start using the account for something worse.

Language has an influence on how one thinks. But this shower thought smacks of too great a generalization to me.

For your own mental health, I would suggest you stop living in this sub.

There are few feces filled salvoes flung at Melon Usk that I would object to. This is not one of them. The question I have though is this: do we need a new Twitter? It had its time in the sun but most people look back at it through rose tinted glasses. Before the takeover by the son of South African emerald mine owners, Twitter was in deep trouble. It had cultural relevance but was a financial flop. It benefited from being the first service of its kind with sufficient reach. I don't think Twitter would have survived without the Nazi saluting shithead either. Its decline would have been more graceful by comparison. It would have done it without the bullshit tsunami emanating from the top, it wouldn't have had the money to digitally undress people or other adventures in so-called AI, but I believe it would have faded anyway. People have split up from the one consensus platform to many different ones and making people switch is hard. So coming back now with a new Twitter is like announcing we will electrocute another Topsy next week. That turned heads more than a century ago but we have moved on.

If a guillotine is not okay, how about a piece of cake? It has the French Revolution connection but looks cute and delicious.

The Marie Antoinette quote is probably apocryphal but wgaf.

I don't like the direction Google is taking Android. I'm not in favor of this enforced developer registration.

"Seems to" is not the same as "did." With a couple of LLMs and a bit of time others could've dropped these rave reviews as well. It isn't far fetched that it is Google. But from a PR point of view they'd be stupid if it was them. They gain nothing but bad headlines from a stunt like that. So we probably need a bit more proof than some screenshots.

Don't share this online. The enemy bots are listening.

I would demand to see passports if all the phone operators are really Swiss, like promised. And then complain if they're not.

The "why no more risky video games?" post was mentioned in this thread. If it was moderator intervention and you remember the post title and instance it was on you can try to look up the modlog and see if you can find it there. Open the web version and scroll down to the bottom to see the link.

I use a third-party client that puts the baby emoji by the user name for new accounts. In the age of bots and repeat sock puppet account offenders, you reply to baby emojis in great detail at your own peril. You could make it part of your routine that if you wrote more than 100 words in reply to somebody you snap a quick screenshot of the post before you move on.

It is a bugbear for some, irregardless of when the first example was documented. Loose/lose has the potential to be such an annoyance. For some people.

The word "new" can carry a connotation of "recent" but it more literally implies "the latest version." For all intensive purposes, I did not mean to imply the controversy about the metaphorical use of "literally" was a recent development.

Déjà-vu, mon faux-nez. New account, real wordy post, same subject as a few days ago ...

This will literally be the new literally, I guess.

Spelling conventions have taken quite a hit in the age of automated subtitles. We're devolving to the 1600s where this was more vibe based. I think there is also an element of wanting to show human frailty in content so no one suspects you of pushing slop.