LogFAQs > #925626674

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Shooting in El Paso, looks like 20 dead
TomNook 08/04/19 8:40:57 PM #348:	Umbreon posted... TomNook posted... I don't want to play the source game Then you probably shouldn't be posting "information" as potentially true, as the natural reaction is to wonder where you found that out at. Especially when it comes to something we have limited info about and have conflicting info. You gave a conflicting bit of info, then refused to elaborate on it until just now. It looks suspicious. foolm0r0n posted... TomNook posted... when one could instead look at what is actually presented and piece things together with their eyes and brain Sure Just don't call it confirmed and don't call it neutral next time I posted the shooter's twitter. Do you want a news link that has political sway to the left or right? Posting the actual person's twitter is literally as neutral as it gets. That was exactly what I was trying to avoid, because if posted a right source, it would be like "this doesn't count becuase it's right wing" and if I posted a left source "this doesn't count because it's left wing". Nrrr posted... Stop being disingenuous. There is no evidence whatsoever that this guy, even if you operate under the assumption that is his Twitter, did the shooting to further leftist causes or was fighting fascism. I never said he did. In fact, I even said multiple times that he probably didn't do the shooting for political reasons. I just said he supports Antifa. You can support something, and not do something for them for a cause. --- Bells, bells, bells! <cite>TomNook posted [p:925626674] in Shooting i... [t:77912710]...</cite> <quote>Umbreon posted...</cite> <quote>TomNook posted...</cite> <quote>I don't want to play the source game</quote> Then you probably shouldn't be posting "information" as potentially true, as the natural reaction is to wonder where you found that out at. Especially when it comes to something we have limited info about and have conflicting info. You gave a conflicting bit of info, then refused to elaborate on it until just now. It looks suspicious.</quote> foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote>TomNook posted...</cite> <quote>when one could instead look at what is actually presented and piece things together with their eyes and brain</quote> Sure Just don't call it confirmed and don't call it neutral next time</quote> I posted the shooter's twitter. Do you want a news link that has political sway to the left or right? Posting the actual person's twitter is literally as neutral as it gets. That was exactly what I was trying to avoid, because if posted a right source, it would be like "this doesn't count becuase it's right wing" and if I posted a left source "this doesn't count because it's left wing". Nrrr posted...</cite> <quote>Stop being disingenuous. There is no evidence whatsoever that this guy, even if you operate under the assumption that is his Twitter, did the shooting to further leftist causes or was fighting fascism.</quote> I never said he did. In fact, I even said multiple times that he probably didn't do the shooting for political reasons. I just said he supports Antifa. You can support something, and not do something for them for a cause. --- Bells, bells, bells!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1