Apparently I work at the animal shelter now. I wish! But I'm allergic to dust mites so I can't have anything with fur otherwise I'd sneeze myself to death.

What are you talking about, I never threatened to leave. Trolls on my back aren't anyone else's concern, if anything I make fun of them, I wouldn't use that to garner sympathy and manipulate people into seeing me as a victim. Why would I, they're hilariously petty.

No, I don't mean "made to agree with us". I mean defending his opinions with facts instead of lies.
I talked to him too, many times, and experienced in lesser extent the patterns he demonstrated here. So that's just your experience vs my experience.
As I said, I was speaking for myself. If other people here did this or that in the past, it shouldn't happen but I don't see how I can be held responsible for other people's actions. I've had downvoting stalkers and mean commenting stalkers too, they're hilarious.
You keep bringing up that I made a joke and portraying it as if I've "lost it" and whatnot. It's literally a meme from George of the Jungle. We already went over this, and I won't waste any more of my time explaining it to you. See you in another thread.

If it's true that he had other comments which were flagged and removed, that honestly sucks and the comments should be reinstated so we can read them in full. I personally didn't see any extra comments and I find it a little weird that you've only mentioned this at the very end of the thread, but okay, I believe you. Until then there's not much we can do. I only reacted to the comments I saw, I couldn't react to ones I didn't see.

Look, I can't speak for everyone in this thread but the only reason I've still been replying to famous is because I still believed he could be reasoned with. Even if I poked fun at him at the beginning, at the end of the day I was just asking for proof of his claims. If I believed he was "too far gone" I would have downvoted him and moved on with my life, because it's not exactly pleasant to be debating someone who keeps saying demonstrably untrue things and denying that you've already debunked them.
Your theory that we all just did this for an ego boost is very far from the truth. It doesn't really make sense either. Do you think we feel good when we get to put him down? No, of course not, he's part of the community and it's sad to see him change. He could be reasoned with back in the day, we had fun debates about politics where we disagreed but it was fine. Now it's just mentally tiring to read comments where every other sentence is a lie.

@poopun So well said, thank you. You put into words what I'm not eloquent enough to express.

Well damn, didn't think that wanting people to support their claims with evidence was such a high standard to make people so mad but I guess it was. I'm offering free shrugs for anyone demanding them.

"Please just tell me what to do to have a normal conversation here"
"You could provide proof of your claims"
"Wow so abusive k bye"
Yeah, this just tells me everything I need to know. You're lucky xvarnah gave you that get out of convo free card (in the form of more strawmanning, of course, in their usual style) otherwise you'd actually have to defend your opinions with facts. Peace out, indeed.

Then provide instances of voter fraud. From a source that isn't full of shit. You said there were instances of dead people voting, from addresses that don't exist, or flipped by the software. Any details or examples?

True, sometimes I wonder why I still bother. I've danced this dance many times, he pulls off the Trump/Ben Shapiro/every right wing grifter act well. Disprove a claim and he'll just make another. Then you spend 10 minutes doing research just to prove he's full of shit and he'll ignore that to make more false claims.

@famousone I'll address your points when you have some. So far you've bounced from "there is fraud and I have proof" to "well I don't because *they're* hiding it" to "well can't I even ask questions and voice my concerns? Why are the people asking questions getting banned by social media?" At which point I asked how you'd solve the social media problem, hoping for a productive conversation, and that has been promptly ignored, instead you defaulted to "well there is fraud and even though I have zero evidence, it's clear everyone is just too blind to see it, now let me be smug and act like I'm smarter than everyone else". I'll gladly debate you on the substance but I haven't seen any from you so far.

@darkness_within The heritage foundation is actually so full of shit. When you check out the database, they show the year of all those fraud instances happening in 2020. This is no doubt done to make people think it's related to the presidential election (they don't specify it's the year of conviction, the database actually only says "year" so most people assume it's when the fraud happened). But when you open up individual entries, turns out a bunch of them are from like... a 2016 city council of Nowhere, AZ election. Or a guy voting twice in the 2016 general election. Actually, in some entries they don't even write the year, you gotta follow the link to the news story (which is a shortened bit . ly, so you can't even tell the year by the URL). And turns out it's something that happened in 2018 or 19. I haven't gone through all the links yet but so far like 80% of the entries tagged as 2020/21 are actually incidents from years prior unrelated to the presidential election.

Sure honey, just keep it coming with the smug comments. After all that's all you got since you don't have anything substantive to add.
Darkness and I talking about the large difference in vote numbers equals not knowing how electoral college works, hmm... so did you even read the comments, did you scan them for points to react to or do you just see it more fitting to twist them to appear more correct? Again, you're not only wrong, you're dishonest. It's tiring to debate a stubborn person, but it's even more tiring to debate a dishonest actor.
I'm tired, I'd just like to have an honest discussion here. Without people trying to twist what I say or putting words in my mouth, or claiming there's proof and then showing none or pointing to dubious "sources", or claiming that a joke is actually an accusation, or throwing around insults like it's candy on Halloween. Is that so hard?

@darkness_within (i posted the previous comment before I saw your new one so I'm only replying now) hopefully not, but I'm afraid you're right. Anyone can scroll up and see how the convo really went but few will. If that's the case with just a comment section, can we expect people to do their research and fact check everything?

@darkness_within Well said. I've looked into the case of the Texan woman as well, and apparently she was trolling them because she saw that they were trying something. Whether that's true or a lie to cover her ass, I don't know. But she wouldn't have flipped 7 million votes in multiple states. The fact that one woman is maybe guilty of fraud doesn't mean it's all one giant conspiracy. I've been laughing at the Dems for implicating Russia in 2016 and I'm laughing at the Trumpets now for acting in the exact same tribalist way.
@poopun Great point about the extremist mindset. Extremists don't see themselves as extremists, they go by the mantra "desperate times call for desperate measures". Islamic extremists think the exact same way, many movements that are now seen as terrorist started as efforts to bring stability and order to rural regions which the government ignored, for example in Pakistan.

Also, I was talking to him until you interrupted actually, and it's really really ironic that you're attacking me on that basis when the only reason I'm not talking to him right now is because you decided to rudely insert yourself in the situation and start spewing logical fallacies at me. In fact I'd much rather be talking to him right now because the entire convo with you is you making strawmen and trying to put words in my mouth and me defending against it. By the way, not a very clever tactic when the unedited comments are literally right here in this thread. But what do I know, apparently I don't even know shapes and colours. Also apparently I'm made of straw.

Rachel Maddow is an extremist? That's news to me. Over here in reality she's a milquetoast liberal. Just like famous is, to my knowledge, a pretty milquetoast right winger who just happened to really attach himself to this idea of fraud, just like Maddow got attached to the idea of Russia fraud. How shifted is your perception of the political spectrum if Rachel fucking Maddow is an extremist in your eyes? Do you know anything about anything?

Lol from my earlier convos with him I'd say I doubt that, but maybe he can take this one.

I *literally* did not say that at all, I said the STATEMENT is conspiratorial, not that HE is a conspiracy nut. I didn't call him an extremist at any point. I also didn't say that asking questions or being skeptical is conspiratorial, just the statement that 'the truth is out there but "they" are obstructing it' is.
Yes, if you listed every instance, you'd have quite a list. That's why I brought up statistics which have already done the listing and comparing for you.
Seriously, stop trying to misrepresent and strawman me, it's really gross. If you can't be right, at least don't be dishonest.

The toad thing was a joke. For the people claiming everyone's easily offended by jokes these days, you guys sure can't take a joke.

As for voter fraud, I'll believe it when I see it. The courts have dismissed every claim of voter fraud so I guess the random pictures circulating the internet claiming to be people carrying ballots were bullshit. Saying 'oh it's because "they" are obstructing it' is conspiracy theory bs.
Point two, people being censored and booted off social media. I agree with you, it shouldn't happen. But how do we solve it? Do we regulate social media companies, or do we create a government controlled social media that will allow free speech? I agree that there is a problem but it seems that each solution brings other potential problems or slippery slopes.
Point three, good on you that you can list all the incidents done by left wingers, like a parrot drunk on Kool Aid. Statistically though, right wing terrorism, including homegrown terrorism, is far more common.
Fourth, I'm not gonna call you a Nazi, the word gets throw around too much, I just think you're the right wing version of Rachel Maddow.

They sure have been raised right. This compassion and common sense is rare these days. Well, probably always has been.