I blocked the comm (as I do any that ban me) but this should be the link to it.
It started off in a completely unrelated discussion, where someone recognized my username and accused me of “supporting genocide of Uighurs,” which is false. I don’t think anyone should start genociding them or anyone else, and have never said anything like that. What I have said before is that I don’t believe claims without evidence, even if following proper due diligence in investigating claims regarding genocide cause people to baselessly scream that I “support genocide.”
So a mod responded by doing what libs do, typing it into Google and picking a handful of headlines that sounded like they support their case and posting them without reading. At that point, I simply asked the mod how many times the name Adrian Zenz was mentioned in his links and whether he considered him a reliable source or not. In lieu of responding, he banned me.
The answer was that his name was referenced 18 times. All of the sources I was provided with depended on this one witness’s testimony, and I’ve cross-examined more credible parrots.
Like, I didn’t even come to that thread to discuss it, nor did I comment on whether the claims were true or not. In response to someone who just had it out for me and was accusing me of bullshit, I defended my position saying I don’t believe claims without evidence and haven’t seen credible evidence.
Frankly, I think the mod (Jordunlund, I believe) realized they couldn’t give a rational response so they banned me instead. Tbh, it’s a ban I wear with pride. A perfect demonstration of liberal anti-intellectualism, of how they’re actively hostile to fact-checking and rationality, perhaps 10% less so than chuds are. No one who repeats the claims in question ever actually bothered to trace the sources to see whether they’re backed by anything, and immediately shut down anyone who does.
I blocked the comm (as I do any that ban me) but this should be the link to it.
It started off in a completely unrelated discussion, where someone recognized my username and accused me of “supporting genocide of Uighurs,” which is false. I don’t think anyone should start genociding them or anyone else, and have never said anything like that. What I have said before is that I don’t believe claims without evidence, even if following proper due diligence in investigating claims regarding genocide cause people to baselessly scream that I “support genocide.”
So a mod responded by doing what libs do, typing it into Google and picking a handful of headlines that sounded like they support their case and posting them without reading. At that point, I simply asked the mod how many times the name Adrian Zenz was mentioned in his links and whether he considered him a reliable source or not. In lieu of responding, he banned me.
The answer was that his name was referenced 18 times. All of the sources I was provided with depended on this one witness’s testimony, and I’ve cross-examined more credible parrots.
Like, I didn’t even come to that thread to discuss it, nor did I comment on whether the claims were true or not. In response to someone who just had it out for me and was accusing me of bullshit, I defended my position saying I don’t believe claims without evidence and haven’t seen credible evidence.
Frankly, I think the mod (Jordunlund, I believe) realized they couldn’t give a rational response so they banned me instead. Tbh, it’s a ban I wear with pride. A perfect demonstration of liberal anti-intellectualism, of how they’re actively hostile to fact-checking and rationality, perhaps 10% less so than chuds are. No one who repeats the claims in question ever actually bothered to trace the sources to see whether they’re backed by anything, and immediately shut down anyone who does.