There is no deep philosophy or logical argumentation going on here.
All we’re telling you is someone pointed out why the strategy doesn’t work to change minds and the only thing you can come up with is “hurr durr nazi”.
If nazzis and I agree 1+1 makes 2 that doesn’t mean we’re all Nazzis.
Now, we’re going to count many examples you used to illustrate your point:
I counted one, and this was it right here:
If nazzis and I agree 1+1 makes 2 that doesn’t mean we’re all Nazzis.
Using a single example to make a point of comparison is dumb. Because one could just as easily say that I breathe air, and similarly, so do hamsters, therefore- I must be a hamster.
Demonstrably, this is untrue. And it’s a dumb argument to make. And it’s not the argument I made. I simply said that calling upon a similarity
shared with Nazis isn’t going to make the point one would probably wish to make.
(And the plural of Nazi is “Nazis.” Don’t be afraid to spell their name correctly. It’s not for the purpose of showing respect to them, it’s showing respect to the person that has to read what you’re saying)
We aren’t allowed to critique strategy or work together to better ourselves or our plans with outside views that allow us to see and adjust to match an ever changing world…
That would be so bad for my social media feed. The algorithm would have to completely relearn what I like and that would be a hassle.
Imagine being able to justify yourself by finding commonality with Nazis.
He means that the nazis wont give a samb about the downvotes and that it would be better to be clear to their faces.
That’s what I thought I was doing.
That’s… not what they are saying. They are critiquing the strategy. If nazzis and I agree 1+1 makes 2 that doesn’t mean we’re all Nazzis.
I don’t understand why so many struggle with addressing the message and are so eager to shoot the messenger. It’s weird but really common on Lemmy.
Using one example to make the rule is bad logic.
I don’t even know what your point is.
There is no deep philosophy or logical argumentation going on here.
All we’re telling you is someone pointed out why the strategy doesn’t work to change minds and the only thing you can come up with is “hurr durr nazi”.
You have some growing to do it seems.
Okay, let me try and help. You said this:
Now, we’re going to count many examples you used to illustrate your point:
I counted one, and this was it right here:
Using a single example to make a point of comparison is dumb. Because one could just as easily say that I breathe air, and similarly, so do hamsters, therefore- I must be a hamster.
Demonstrably, this is untrue. And it’s a dumb argument to make. And it’s not the argument I made. I simply said that calling upon a similarity shared with Nazis isn’t going to make the point one would probably wish to make.
(And the plural of Nazi is “Nazis.” Don’t be afraid to spell their name correctly. It’s not for the purpose of showing respect to them, it’s showing respect to the person that has to read what you’re saying)
We aren’t allowed to critique strategy or work together to better ourselves or our plans with outside views that allow us to see and adjust to match an ever changing world…
That would be so bad for my social media feed. The algorithm would have to completely relearn what I like and that would be a hassle.