You admit you dont engage with them - which is a perfectly reasonable choice you can make, to be clear - but without an ability to criticize the source, it’s natural for them to form a community to voice their objections to your ideas, and for that community to include context. The antagonism between .ml and non-.ml users enthusiastically goes both ways (the memes you’ve posted here are example enough of that, as is my use of .ml as shorthand for “people that are tankies”). If you don’t want to continue it, it’s probably best to take the classic advice and not feed the trolls.
I don’t really believe a lot of the enthusiasm is coming from people willing to learn or engage in good faith. I’m happy to answer people who aren’t just demanding the US imperial point of view is true and valid by default valid and that I’m some kind of idiot/bot/fed for not agreeing with them.
Sure, and you’re just as complicit in the culture of antagonism as they are. I’m not advocating for your tolerant interaction in the face of hostility, I’m just pointing out that you’re posting blatant ragebait then claiming that the people who take that bait are somehow behaving worse than you are or that they’re not engaging in good faith.
If you think this is ragebait then block me, problem solved. That is what I said at the beginning. I am not posting these memes for you, I don’t care about you at all. There are people who use this service and instance that agree and like these memes. They’re funny. This is for them. If you are getting enraged online, sign the fuck out.
I do think that presenting your critics as cartoon caricatures of thought police is bait, yes. But I don’t particularly care that you’re doing it - I’m just pointing out that a culture of antagonism isn’t the same thing as a culture of persecution, and that you engage in extremely similar behavior to the people you yourself are demonizing. You’re characterizing me as mad about this and I’m truly not (nor have I indicated I even feel particularly strongly about it), but you’re still basing your responses in this interaction as though I am. Why assume that?
You admit you dont engage with them - which is a perfectly reasonable choice you can make, to be clear - but without an ability to criticize the source, it’s natural for them to form a community to voice their objections to your ideas, and for that community to include context. The antagonism between .ml and non-.ml users enthusiastically goes both ways (the memes you’ve posted here are example enough of that, as is my use of .ml as shorthand for “people that are tankies”). If you don’t want to continue it, it’s probably best to take the classic advice and not feed the trolls.
I don’t really believe a lot of the enthusiasm is coming from people willing to learn or engage in good faith. I’m happy to answer people who aren’t just demanding the US imperial point of view is true and valid by default valid and that I’m some kind of idiot/bot/fed for not agreeing with them.
Sure, and you’re just as complicit in the culture of antagonism as they are. I’m not advocating for your tolerant interaction in the face of hostility, I’m just pointing out that you’re posting blatant ragebait then claiming that the people who take that bait are somehow behaving worse than you are or that they’re not engaging in good faith.
If you think this is ragebait then block me, problem solved. That is what I said at the beginning. I am not posting these memes for you, I don’t care about you at all. There are people who use this service and instance that agree and like these memes. They’re funny. This is for them. If you are getting enraged online, sign the fuck out.
I do think that presenting your critics as cartoon caricatures of thought police is bait, yes. But I don’t particularly care that you’re doing it - I’m just pointing out that a culture of antagonism isn’t the same thing as a culture of persecution, and that you engage in extremely similar behavior to the people you yourself are demonizing. You’re characterizing me as mad about this and I’m truly not (nor have I indicated I even feel particularly strongly about it), but you’re still basing your responses in this interaction as though I am. Why assume that?