you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 71 points 2 years ago (5 children)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 2 years 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!!!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -13 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    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?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago

    I upvote it because I see a headline like this and go "damn, based" and then I move on with my life without reading the article or the comments. I think that's what most people do, man. It's a coincidence that I noticed the votes to comments ratio and decided to check it out because when its this even it's usually a shitstorm worth reading.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    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).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Not sure what his beef is with computers, but to be fair, laser printers and aerosol products like hair spray and deodorant really are pretty bad for indoor air quality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 years 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.

  • source
  • parent