Tomorrow_Farewell comments on Comrads, we must provide critical support, not critical thinking!

[–] Tomorrow_Farewell@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 months ago (8 children)

The ordered list in that comment serves no purpose, as the items are not even properly grouped. It just hurts readability.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[+] alapakala -6 points 2 months ago (7 children)

They are grouped by topics 1 respondent, 2 politics, 3 literacy confirmation, 4 thesis, 5 warning, 6 intersection check, 7 commentary, 8 openness to dialogue

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] Tomorrow_Farewell@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 months ago* (6 children)

So, at the very least:

1 and 2 pertain to the same topic. 2 even continues the same sentence.
4 and 5 should be grouped together, as 5 refers to 4.
6 and 7 should be grouped together. In part because they both are just regurgitation of propaganda made by y the same people that sold you on Nayirah's testimony, Iraq WMDs and the like. (Also, have to chuckle at the "campism" but when you very openly engage in pro-NATO campism.)
Just using standard paragraphs and not an ordered list would be more readable, since you are not enumerating anything, nor is there a good case for referring to each of these items by the numbers outside of the conversation about how useless the ordered list is here.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] alapakala -3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

1 differentiates from op, 2 outlines my politics which may also differ from op. Continued sentences is something everyone does, no?

I can def. combine4&5, but will SpookyBogMonster keep quiet about point 4 if 5 is the only choice?

6&7 need to be separated, as 6 is my intersection for Godric’s plea to end campist rhetorics, not my personal antidengist praxis.

you very openly engage in pro-NATO campism

whence?

nor is there a good case for referring to each of these items by the numbers outside of the conversation

brevity, citation, referencing, value, formatting, etc..

I’ll edit an essay format you then.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] Tomorrow_Farewell@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

1 differentiates from op, 2 outlines my politics

Yes, but the way you separated them makes things less readable. They should be combined into the same sentence, not into two separate numbered list items.

I can def. combine4&5, but will SpookyBogMonster keep quiet about point 4 if 5 is the only choice?

Not clear what you mean here.

6&7 need to be separated, as 6 is my intersection for Godric’s plea to end campist rhetorics

Firstly, what do you mean by "intersection for a plea"? I suspect you think that the word "intersection" means something other than what it means.
Secondly, Godric isn't making any pleas here. Godric is simply running propaganda for the most prolific invader in the world and hates on socialists.

whence?

I will assume you meant "where?", and not "whence?". I suspect that you think that those words are synonyms.
Like, for example, when you claimed that Salvador Allende did a genocide. Also, complaints about "campism" are usually just support for colonialism (highly doubt that that is not the case for you). I can find more examples.

brevity, citation, referencing, value, formatting, etc…

It isn't any more brief than using standard paragraphs, nor does it simplify referencing, as one would just use markdown quotation for that here anyway.
Not at all sure what you mean by "value" here.
Your chosen way of formatting texts just makes them less readable.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] alapakala -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Godric is simply running propaganda for the most prolific invader in the world and hates on socialists.

Then you can see why i made distinctions for points 1,2,5,6&7.

Whence.

you claimed that Salvador Allende did a genocide.

Whence?

Also, complaints about “campism” are usually just support for colonialism (highly doubt that that is not the case for you).

They aren't, since I made points 1,2,5&7 pretty clear. Unless you think PSL abused antidengist black anarchists are colonists.

I can find more examples.

For yourself, a narrative, my question, anticolonialism, anti PRC, anti PSL, kittenzrulz123/emberkitty, Chileans, slavers, campists, or?

Your chosen way of formatting texts just makes them less readable.

I already essayed the former reply just for you, and applied your recommendations. SpookyBogMonster, kittenzrulz123, and you can mostly reread and address it if you want.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Tomorrow_Farewell@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Then you can see why i made distinctions for points 1,2,5,6&7.

No.

Whence?

The word is "where", not "whence". "Whence" means "where from", not "where".
Alternatively, you could use "when" in this context.

To answer your question, around the 30th of July, you were repeatedly asserting that kittenzrulz did apologia for a supposed genocide by Salvador Allende (among other things).

They aren’t, since I made points 1,2,5&7 pretty clear.

I mean, you do seem to complain about the PRC, as well as about the USSR a lot here, despite them being some of the most prominent anti-colonial forces during relevant timeframes. Judging by your assertions like how Allende did a genocide, as well as similar ones, your hatred for them seems to simply stem from your pro-NATO campism and the fact that your empire told you to hate those polities.

Unless you think PSL abused antidengist black anarchists are colonists.

This isn't even a grammatically sound sentence. Frankly, what is up with your English?
Are you asserting that the PSL claimed that pro-NATO "anarchists" are pro-colonialism? If so, then yeah. Those people support the colonial metropole(s) efforts to colonially subjugate the Global South, which does make them supporters of colonialism.

For yourself, a narrative, my question, anticolonialism, anti PRC, anti PSL, kibblebits, Chileans, slavers, campists, or?

What are you even asking here?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] alapakala 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

No.

Then you are literary handicapped.

whence adverb

from what place or source

You made me cite a dictionary, since you're literary handicapped.

around the 30th of July, you were repeatedly asserting that kittenzrulz did apologia for a supposed genocide by Salvador Allende (among other things)

Source your claims, since you're literary handicapped.

you do seem to complain about the PRC, as well as about the USSR a lot here, despite them being some of the most prominent anti-colonial forces during relevant timeframes.

Anti colonial forcing the Ukrainian genocide, Filipino larceny, Japanese island debates, Indian border bounties, do I go for more examples?

What are you even asking here?

For whom are the examples you wanted bring up for, what purpose does it serve than blatantly sidetracking gish gallop?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Tomorrow_Farewell@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Then you are literary handicapped.

Ah, ableism. Incredibly misplaced, to boot.
What you are saying is that you had to separate those points of your original list because of Godric's actions that were contrary to what you originally claimed. How those things are connected, you are yet to explain.

You made me cite a dictionary, since you’re literary handicapped.

More ableism.

"From what source?" also doesn't work as a question in those context. You could have either asked "where/when did I say that?", or made the request "cite me saying/implying that". At best, if we are to keep "whence", it should be "Whence does it follow?"

Also, "literary" and "literally" (and "literarily", for that matter) are not synonyms, and "literary" does not work in this context.

Source your claims

Here's you complaining about being banned for trolling in a memes community by making the aforementioned assertions. The context is provided in the comments, and does include people quoting your "Salvador Allende's genocide" thing.

Anti colonial forcing the Ukrainian genocide

Except there hasn't been a "Ukrainian genocide" apart from the Lebensraum+the Holocaust, carried out by Germany and their allies (including such groups as the OUN).
If you want to claim that the famine of 1932 in the USSR (which, I remind you, affected the entire union, rather than some particular group (unlike, say Churchill's Bengal famine, or the Irish potato famine), which is what we would expect from a genocide) was somehow a genocide, then you should present your study to the historians that specialise on that famine, as they have come to a very different conclusion from you.

Filipino larceny

The what?

Japanese island debates

It's silly how you think that the Kuril islands should belong to unrepentant genocidaires that are under control of NATO.
What is your argument here, even?

Indian border bounties

What "bounties"?

do I go for more examples?

You are yet to provide even one example for why we should supposedly consider the USSR and the PRC as bad. At least try to elaborate on what you have already claimed.

For whom are the examples you wanted bring up for

I am speaking with you, am I not?

what purpose does it serve than blatantly sidetracking gish gallop?

A Gish gallop would be if I just kept throwing different examples without elaborating. Kind of like you did in your last comment.
Wait, do you even know what "Gish gallop" is, and why it has "gallop" in the name?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent