this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
-95 points (5.6% liked)

politics

19050 readers
3736 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.
  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
[–] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Monk's script:

  • "I didn't write the article, I just posted it", even though posting propaganda is the same thing as writing it
  • "I'm just posting articles that I found interesting", even though they can't ever explain what they find so interesting and will shut down if asked
  • "If you feel that the article is against the rules, let the mods know", even though no one said Monk was breaking the rules by posting propaganda. They like to post the mod log link after someone brings it up, for seemingly no reason.
  • "I'm not voting for Kamala or Trump", even though a vote for third parties is just going to empower a vote for Trump
  • "I'm not voting for [third party candidate], I'm voting for [third party candidate]"
  • Something about how they don't have to explain anything about themselves even though they reply anyway
  • Something about a community they created to seem more genuine
  • Some form of sarcastic or fake "thank you" even though no one asked for their thanks, all likely to appear nice at a passing glance
  • Using ":)" in another failed attempt to seem nice
  • Calling you "friend" in yet another misguided attempt to appear nice at the surface
  • Demanding proof for otherwise reasonable claims (sealioning).
[–] pooperNickel@lemm.ee 9 points 1 week ago
[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

A lot of their content are tortured contrivances to be able to respond with "no you," because they are emotionally a petulant child.

For example, regarding supporting a viable candidate instead of throwing a vote in the trash, they respond with, "every vote for your viable candidate harms the chances of [nonviable third party who isn't even on the ballots]."