Sidechat icon
Join communities on Sidechat Download
Bait used to be believable
This post is unavailable
upvote 7 downvote

default user profile icon
Deleted 12w

Comment Deleted

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Deleted 12w

Comment Deleted

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 12w

I won‘t debate someone arguing in bad faith while trying too hard to seem as if they aren’t. End of story.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Deleted 12w

Comment Deleted

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 12w

„Does this prove that they’re being spoon fed opinions rather than formulating their own beliefs“ If you call that good faith, I have a bridge in Alaska to sell you. Maybe don‘t try to gaslight people when they have your own words right in front of them. And if you’re that unaware that other people can comprehend speech, you should maybe get off this sub.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Deleted 12w

Comment Deleted

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 12w

you really are proving their point here

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 12w

I‘ve not parroted a single opinion here on this post. Other than utilizing the common phrase at the beginning to signal the kind of larper you were, the core premise of my post (the idea that you never intended to engage in good faith on your arguments) continues to be proven right every time you further this line of reasoning.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 12w

My opinion in the beginning was simply that you never intended to hold a good-faith discussion (not anything to do with Israel) and it remains unchanged now. My position was never stated on Israel, and to say I am simply „parroting the antis“ has no factual standing here.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 12w

I was simply taking note of the unbelievably slanted framing attached to your post, which was indicative of someone with a presupposed conclusion who would use shoddy post-hoc reasoning to support it. And I’ve been proven right on both counts in real time.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 12w

As for you #2, you seem like the kinda guy who’d fall for a pyramid scheme, full offense intended.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 12w

I was literally agreeing with you. I was saying #1 is proving your point that they are not here for good faith.

upvote 2 downvote
default user profile icon
Deleted 12w

Comment Deleted

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #2 11w

Sorry I got confused since you responded to their post not mine.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 11w

I did have a look at your comments, and they do seem to be in good faith *after the ball got rolling on the discussion*. I get being defensive about presenting political points given the number of trolls on here, and I apologize for being aggressive, but I won’t apologize for my initial reaction.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 11w

Writing a post such that it implies that others are dumb for holding a certain position, and then expecting a good faith argument is fundamentally a bad faith strategy. That’s probably why you never had any productive conversation on the issue in the first place. If you want a good faith discussion, act like it from the start. Kinda stupid not to do so if having productive discussions is your actual objective.

upvote 1 downvote