TheTechnician27 @ TheTechnician27 @lemmy.world

"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it, so that when men come t

---

Read more

Posts

171

Comments

1,338

Joined

12 mo. ago

Actually, no, this isn't correct. Go to Page 4 of Monk's post history, and you'll see that indeed all of those numbers are posts to /c/politics. @PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat was correct here; I was checking the wrong month.

EDIT: @PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat is right that Monk substantially ramped up their post count in the month of October, being typically 6+ per day. I was mistaken about point 1 for that month, although I stand by that other months like September, they were about 3 per day.

I'll note that I consistently called out Monk to the point that multiple comments of mine lambasting them got deleted (the mods were just being fair and enforcing the rules consistently; hats off).

However, there are some points you've failed to take into account:

1. (Most important) Monk posted to /c/politics at most about three times per day. This is realistically the bare minimum amount you'd want as a cap on posts per day. You can go back and check this for yourself; the overwhelming majority of their posts were on communities they created and moderated. Checking the month of September, the exception I saw to this was September 8th, where they posted four. This rule would have done absolutely nothing to deter their propaganda campaign.
2. As your own comment notes, making alts is a trivial matter, especially assuming you're more subtle about the angle you're pushing than Monk was. That I was aware of Monk for months but knew and heard nothing about these purported alts is, to me, evidence of that.
3. Every single post by Monk was heavily downvoted because everyone knew what they were doing.
4. The main problem with Monk was their comments, wherein they would engage in essentially copy-pasting Gish gallop responses. The moderators knew banning Monk would've made the community healthier because of this exact behavior but refused to take action.
5. Even if the problem had been the quantity of the posts to /c/politics (it wasn't), the moderators would've been able to use their discretion to ban Monk instead of a blanket ban on frequent posts.

TL;DR: Monk's problem on /c/politics had nothing to do with and could not have been stopped by such a rule proposed in the OP.

I have yet to see any frequent posters pushing misinformation.

I have yet to see any frequent posters discouraging participation.

I have yet to see any frequent posters pushing quantity over quality.

To me, it seems like this post is addressing what's currently a non-issue. That is, this feels like someone's pet peeve about frequent posters dressed up as something beneficial using a list of non-applicable pros.

Meanwhile, news communities are posted to so infrequently on Lemmy that literal bots exist to fill the gaps. I would much prefer a human than a bot indiscriminately hammering the community with news (absent any evidence whatsoever that this would improve human engagement, when realistically, any humans who'd want to participate could do so at any time but haven't).

So this "article" is just a regurgitation of a press release by the company making them. Cool. Cool, cool, cool.

Would you like somebody to introduce you to broccoli? There's a lot of ways to enjoy it, and it's much more than just a boring "health food" (while simultaneously providing the benefits of a boring "health food").

I'm really sorry, but "Stacey Champagne" sounds like the stage name of a porn star. 💀

This is just one of multiple bangs for the Internet Archive, and probably more intuitive and quick ones include:

• !ia for the Internet Archive generally
• !wbm for the Wayback Machine

Obviously the newest Intel is the 13th generation

Erm

Why read an actual article written by humans when you can turn it into more generative AI garbage instead? 🙄

"People of Earth, I am Lrrr of the planet Omicron Persei 8."

Useless red circle.

You understand why advertising when it isn't clearly labeled as such is worse, right?

Your punishment is already that you can't healthily enjoy the company of a woman and that you can't post anything other than unfunny boomer Facebook memes; what else do you want?

Every fucking conservative piece of shit toiletpaper rag is free, but anything to the left of these whether it's liberal or even socialist is all pay to read.

Did you consider that it might be because one is actual journalism and thus requires a lot of time and effort to perform, while the other one is petulant, bigoted crying in a way that a high schooler could write with zero or minimal fact-checking in 20 minutes?

Elegant bit of trolling. Hats off.

A law would be something that they might be able to get passed if they actually wanted to pass it

I can understand someone continually misunderstanding how this works; what I can't understand at all is why people keep upvoting it so heavily with so little pushback. When the Supreme Court makes a ruling on something, they're making a ruling on whether something is permitted under the Constitution. In order to reverse Citizens United, you have to either a) amend that Constitution so it no longer says the words that the SCOTUS ruled on or b) wait for a new SCOTUS which will overturn that prior ruling.

when they were able to maybe pass it?

Lmfao when was this? A constitutional amendment of any kind has zero chance of getting passed by anyone and hasn't in the entire time the Citizens United ruling has existed.

Democrats around that time could barely muster enough votes from the Republicans to pass the milquetoast, conservative ACA via simple majority. You're deluded if you think Democrats ever could've plausibly reversed Citizens United via amendment.

But Mom would be sad! :(

Nuclear weapons didn't prevent Ukraine.

If you know even a single thing about Ukraine's history as an independent country, you know this comment is completely braindead and oozing with irony.

It's fascinating to me that people prefer shitty nagware over 7-zip only because they think they're "getting one over" by not paying for inferior software and/or feel nostalgic for it.