How someone took out an ad for the 100th Anniversary for the Armenian Genocide.
Then the author pretend echo-chambers and idiotic rhetoric, that I am confident they buy into, doesn't exist online.
> and have gone to lengths to ensure its origins are untraceable
No, they have one of the many whois protection service upsells that you check a box or the box is even already checked for you. This is not great lengths, stop writing up every tiniest possible piece of garbage you find online as an ad-bait article.
Do people realize what this entire article, and the person who has submitted it, are doing?
Tweet -> article
Search term trending -> article
Don't understand the search term? -> article about the fact that it's trending
I came back here to check on this comment (since it was an empty comment, that's why I prompted you with "why")
And in doing so I saw the rather nice (entirely unlike the passive aggressive nature of reddit) notice to read the approach to comments.
Two points I liked: Upvote what is substantial. Make substantial comments. What would have been better is "consider using the word 'because' in your comments", because people don't (see what I did there?)
But then I saw something I didn't like. The whole "what you would say face to face". You know why? Some idiot tried to use what I suspect is this very "rule" as a fallacy for a comment I made on reddit.
The people running this have some ideas, but they are half baked.
If you can't write an API to let me punch this person remotely, at least let me downvote them.