Is this an answer from an LLM or something? I’m confused.

Also saying things like that implies that everyone having shit lives are in their situation by choice. It’s typically something that only people with nice lives say, because they want to delude themselves into thinking that they deserve it, and that people with shit lives deserve it too; it’s obviously easier than to admit that you are lucky and privileged and that the world is an unfair place filled with undeserved suffering.

Wow, I expected filthy messages but yet that went above and beyond.

Maybe instead of piano lessons you should have found morals lessons instead.

Because education has been used as a class discriminator since forever.

You want people to stop preferring football over books? Then make schools fair and equal, instead of favouring dominant classes and money.

The reason Trump got elected is because he used fascism as a tool (the same kind that you’re using actually, “make America great again” doesn’t convince people who think everything is perfect), not because of education. And it’s not like education prevents propaganda from working (it often helps it actually) so this is just bullshit.

If you want people to be smart, first stop this moronic class discrimination.

Amazing to have a second point that explains how you could have the guts to post the first point.

What a loser though.

“Disagreeing with their lifestyle” implies that you admit that queer people have a lifestyle that is not “normal”, for people to disagree with it. This is already a discriminating statement.

You do not need to repeat the arguments of fascists to be able to counter them. “No discrimination” on its own is enough to ban any -phobic comment, you don’t need to preemptively do anything more.

That’s the kind of stuff that makes it look like a clean “front” for a breeding grounds of fascism. Whether or not that’s the case, it immediately becomes an implicit attack on queer people and then you end up filtering everyone out except the ones that are fine with attacks on queer people. (Assuming that making a community about conservatism didn’t already do that)

I don’t go to your history, I just have tagged your account because many, many times when I see one of your posts or comment they have some form of creepiness to them. And so after seeing so many creepy posts with the same username, I started seeing the pattern.

And for example, this justification of “engagement” seems already pretty suspicious on its own.

If you are actually genuine, then you really, really need to work on the kind of things you’re posting and the way you present them, because they make your account look like a troll account of some sort. And you might need to search for interesting discussions, rather than engagement. Quality over quantity.

This account was always like that

This is how an update news should be done. Summarize the software, include the changelog.

You can spoof your mac address every 5 minutes if you want, what are they going to track?

Because who doesn’t want dead code in their apps huh?

Software? Reliable? What?

Why do you think places that need reliability are stuck of systems made decades and decades ago? They know that software is shit and unreliable and that you should never touch it if you have something that works.

So someone who was saying that violence, accidents, and rape are all in the same category, is now wanting to know how to hide a dead body? Yeah nothing suspicious here.

“Humanity finds out once again that they conveniently dismissed sentient beings as brainless objects, puts into perspective the assumed intelligence of said humanity” can really cover a whole bunch of articles.

The opposite also works

There’s a lot of shit writing in all the star treks (less so in lower decks maybe) but discovery is consistently, deeply badly written, and in ways that often have a pretty bad underlying meaning.

And also, people complain on Discovery for different reasons. Nazis find it too woke because they don’t pretend that lgbt people don’t exist, I find it fakely woke but actually discriminating against minorities while pretending to defend them.

In a way, Discovery is a shittily written, enlightened-centrist version of star trek, so I think it’s good that people shit on it. Now people should obviously shit on a lot of other star treks like Enterprise and Picard, but I’m certainly not going to stop shitting on discovery in the meanwhile.

It feels a bit pulled out of nowhere though. If it was the plan from the start, it’s not very good writing.

The red angel, who is supposed to be either Burnham or her mother, and neither of them had a reason to go back in time to save a random church, and teleport it to a random planet. Also absolutely no mention of how they would achieve such a thing.

I mean, they were still trying to show it as James Bond-cool (which I mean, works if you see that James Bond is pretty problematic, but most people don’t)… They were shown as a bit evil, but also as the “cool, edgy dudes that do what needs to be done”, but other shows managed to do worse somehow.

Let’s not forget the part where they want to go in the future to stop control because they think they can’t destroy it, then control gets destroyed, then they go in the future anyway.

Also, I don’t think any star trek depicted section 31 in a way that didn’t make the show worse, but Discovery really went the extra mile

The church in Discovery.

I am convinced that they put it there without having an explanation yet, then forgot they did it when they made the explanation.