• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    ITT: trolls seizing upon a clickbait headline and out-of-context quote in order to make blatantly delusional strawman arguments.

    • Shalakushka@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s literally two idiots contorting into ludicrous shapes just to stay mad about this. It’s wild.

      WHAT ABOUT THE TRUCKS??? I am going to quote one clause of the article over and over to prove I didn’t read it and get mad at people who suggest that anything could change in any way, ever! Trucks are part of human DNA and the moment an 18 wheeler can’t smog up your back yard is when we have all lost our freedumb!!!

    • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      People not realising the Telegraph is one step up from shitty xenophobic racist shitrags like The S*n

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ok, then why was an article from this source even posted to this community in the first place, and why is it popular enough to be at the top of the community right now?

        If it’s such a bad article and source and does not represent the values of this community, shouldn’t it have a lot more down votes? And also fewer community members defending the content of the article?

        • drkt
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          deleted by creator

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If it’s such a bad article and source and does not represent the values of this community, shouldn’t it have a lot more down votes? And also fewer community members defending the content of the article?

          I get the impression that the Lemmy “fuck cars” communities have a much larger percentage of concern trolls (case in point: you, frankly, who inspired the comment at the top of this chain in the first place!) than the R*ddit one did. It might be a function of smaller community size + relative ease of reaching “All” [what’s a good way of notating that for Lemmy, BTW?]. It could also be a difference in moderation zealousness and/or priorities, although I feel like I’ve noticed the same phenomenon across both !fuckcars@lemmy.world and !fuck_cars@lemmy.ml, so maybe not (I haven’t been paying close enough attention to be sure, though).

          • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            So basically, this community is an echo chamber that will upvote any drivel which supports the prevailing narrative no matter how poorly written or thought out, and shout down any dissenting opinions or critical voices and dismiss them as “trolling” (which I am obviously not doing, as I am directly addressing the content of the article that was posted).

    • SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, I’m sure the quote is completely out of context and the guy who’s also

      called for people to limit the use of “personal care products”, “computers” and “printers” in their homes which he said were contributing to pollution.

      isn’t just one of those “back-to-monkee, comfort is unnecessary” types.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Also ITT: a lot of people who didn’t actually read the article and are instead making arguments based on their feelings.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean… it’s not a particularly in-depth article. Do you have a better source with more context for Dr. Fuller’s comments?

      The burden of providing better context is on the people who support this point of view, not on the people criticizing what the article says.