Assume v. Presume

@Trev Again if that is aimed at my comment. Not exactly fake news just elements of truth twisted to fit in with their bias and padded out with rumour and speculation just like they all do. It should be read with that in mind and treated with skepticism then fact checked from several other sources including some with an opposing bias to find a balance that is nearer to the truth. As I said before you will learn more from the comments than the articles unless it is Amazing household cleaning hacks from Austrailian influencers that anyone with an ounce of common sense has known for years that rocks your boat.
 
Last edited:
Black Hole said:
Interesting. Being liberal is purely imaginary.

Is there no element of democracy in socialism or conservatism? That plot suggests not.
Click to expand...
That is just a 2D plot. Democracy is part of authoritarianism, on the y axis. Both socialism and conservatism can be democratic or authoritarian.

Soviet Union: authoritarian socialism
UK: democratic socialism
Fascism: authoritarian conservatism
UK: democratic conservatism

Apparently, to model the parties in Germany, you need about 7 dimensions.
 
@trog. My my, you are getting a complex aren't you. My comment was immediately below one made by MikeSh so how you associate it as being 'aimed' at you, I fail to understand.
My acorns hurt.
 
Did anyone see that AstraZeneca EU contract? Sentence after sentence starting

Whereas...

Worse than that bible book

And it came topass...
 
Trev said:
@trog. My my, you are getting a complex aren't you. My comment was immediately below one made by MikeSh so how you associate it as being 'aimed' at you, I fail to understand.
My acorns
Click to expand...
The wording of your post could have been to either of us hence my "If", your mention of fake news when I had posted about distorted news in reply to your previous post and Mike's post not even being about news does not make that a complex it just makes me wonder why you do not use the reply feature or @ to give us a clue as to WTF you are going on about.
 
Trev said:
@trog. My my, you are getting a complex aren't you. My comment was immediately below one made by MikeSh so how you associate it as being 'aimed' at you, I fail to understand.
My acorns hurt.
Click to expand...

trog said:
The wording of your post could have been to either of us hence my "If", your mention of fake news when I had posted about distorted news in reply to your previous post and Mike's post not even being about news does not make that a complex it just makes me wonder why you do not use the reply feature or @ to give us a clue as to WTF you are going on about.
Click to expand...
@trog
There you go, quoted and flagged to avoid any confusion as to who's post I am replying.
If I had been referring it to you, I would certainly have done what I have done here.
But in normal conversation, when you are replying to someone who has just spoken, you don't either repeat what they have just said or specifically flag their attention to that fact that you are talking to them should be bloody obvious.
This stupidity of quoting verbatim the immediately preceding post in a thread is pointless, unnecessary and clutters up the thread, especially when multiple quotes of quotes are used.
Luckily, the latter does not happen a lot here.
 
Trev, I couldn't work out who you meant either, as sometimes someone else immediately replies and inserts their reply before yours.

A short quote takes no more time, and helps us to not get ratty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top