He's not trolling and hasn't personally attacked anyone as far as I know.
He's not trolling and hasn't personally attacked anyone as far as I know.
I'll have to agree on those points but honestly at this point its once every 3 days he comes debates about something that's conspiratorial or easily disprovable and the only sources he relies on are right wing media outlets or neutral biased reputable sources that contradict what he's trying to pull. He's a disingenuous actor who's trying to redpill a forum who's kind of three years too late to the whole red pilling thing.
Guartz is literally that guy saying "HEY LISTEN TO MY DUMB SHIT UNINFORMED OPINION" followed by rebuttals, followed by "JOKE'S ON YOU YOU'RE THE UNINFORMED ONES", followed by "STOP DRINKING THE KOOLAID, SHEEPLE" followed by "Look, you guys just need to listen to the real sources and not just your own, I provide a proper counter-balance to the hyper-left on BG."
Just because we don't like his opinion and his "facts" are incorrect, or at the very least a stretch, doesn't mean he needs to be banned.
Continue to show that his arguments and narratives are incorrect. If someone uninformed is reading all of his stuff, and reading your argument against his posts, then hopefully you're bringing that person to your side.
The problem is Guartz isn't going to change his mind because you've proved him wrong. Guartz will either shift the conversation to some other topic, bring up something else, or disappear for a few days and come back. The dude's been posting for awhile and this is kind of what he's done. When he's debating he's not debating to change your mind. Your mind is already set on trying to destroy his argument meanwhile he's trying to convince the audience that you're a dipshit liberal and he's right and Trump is amazing and he's doing it by whatever means necessary.
I've thought this for months but I've kept my damn mouth shut because I respect that BG as an institution celebrates and values the ability to post whatever dumb opinion you have and get shredded for it but when Kaslo25 has to put your retarded ass on ignore for it I don't see the value in keeping Guartz in YCS.
Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. I don't think you're going to change guartz's opinion. I was talking about a third-party reader that may be uninformed or a moderate.
I feel like that isn't stated enough. Much of the problem arguing with Trump-diehards is not changing their mind, it's preventing other minds from being changed.
If someone reads that article he posted and says "Yeah! Wow! This guy said there was nothing wrong with what Trump did!" but then continues reading, sees our follow up posts, looks back at the article again, they may now think "Wait, these guys have a point. He did still say he was withholding aid. The person Trump was asking to investigate shouldn't really matter if he's withholding aid for the purpose of personal/political agendas." You may sway even one person.
Sorry, may be late now. Was speaking about a contract we had and didn't get to finish my reply.
I'm giving blanket permission to personally attack me on these forums. I don't want people who lost their cool every now and then to be punished.
Did somebody refute to those facts? They still stand if I'm not mistaken.
edit: Things are changing at a rapid pace,
just look at who the alleged whistler blower is. Geez that guy is definitely not just a concerned party, previously fired for leaking? DNC operative all the way.
We do it just to annoy you bb
It's not changing at a rapid pace. You just literally don't read any fucking news outside of garbage right wing sites that have the investigative budget of a small town newspaper. A full week before you posted those "facts", they were refuted, namely the one about Ukraine not knowing the aid was withheld. Which has apparently lead to a new politics meme on the website. Big, if true.
And the whistleblower isn't even relevant anymore. His credentials do not matter. His past...it does not matter. You literally have trump appointed officials corroborating information that led that person to sound the alarm. He could disappear from existence and it would not make the slightest difference in the path of the investigation.
So it's catchphrase infringement now is it?!
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
For what it's worth, it was you guys dunking hard on me during the occupy wall street fiasco that got me to examine some of my views and realize they were sort of fucking stupid.
I used to be totally against universal health care, got set straight by an argument about it here.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk