>>1902>Yes, because saying "blumpf is literally over" truly is an unbiased statement, which is coming from a competent expert of politics. >An anti-trump leftist gets called out on being an anti-trump leftist and for whatever reason that somehow is "debatable" and "needs to be proven."
OP wasn't accused of being biased, or a leftist, or anti-trump. Those are all true. He was accused of making "slide threads".
I think there's nothing wrong with being anti-trump or a leftist. Everyone can have their own political opinion, which you can agree/disagree with, and that's fine.
Also I feel like all people here are biased to some extent, me included. If this mistake was made by biden, would this thread have been criticized the same? But it's ok to be a bit biased, as long as we're able to reason logically.
The problem to me is that this guy got accused of being a shill: accused of making threads not to share news, or to discuss things, but as part of a plan of filling up the catalog with intentionally shit content to convince as many people as possible of his point of view via sheer repetition in a similar way to how repetition advertising works.
Being "biased", "leftist" and "anti-trump" doesn't mean that you are a shill and that your threads are slide threads. There is an abysmal difference: the first is a personal opinion, the second is board sabotage. This thread was called a slide thread for no reason at all imo.
With that out the way, the thread is mediocre. It's bait, plus not really a great source for discussion>>1904>Twitter has proven itself to be not trustworthy
Are you implying that trump never tweeted that, and that twitter fabricated that tweet? I'm pretty sure trump would say something about it if that was the case.
If not, then twitter's a reliable source for the specific topic discussed. Period.>Get /out/ then.
I mostly try to ignore this board. But I care about 22chan, and by extension this place, so I can't resist to try to reason with the people here sometimes>Now you are trying to discredit me
By "you" I didn't mean just you specifically. But I guess I got a little overboard there, sorry. In fact I am wrong. Low effort nazi stuff has actually been called out here before, just checked.>You called me a nazi on no grounds.
I did not call you a nazi. I said that you'd be more prone to ignore a shitty nazi thread than a shitty leftwing thread. But now I see that that's not necessarily true. My mistake.
So, disregarding unjust accusations, do you agree that there is no reason to believe this is in fact a "slide" thread? I can agree that this thread is mediocre (because of the "blumpf is over" bait part)>>1905
Fair. I didn't request because I was under the impression that my view of trashness contrasted with how people perceived the threads. But maybe I should