politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
@madison420 why?
They laid out the uses for the apostrophe very clearly.
All you needed to do was read, understand, then clarify.
You're using the apostrophe incorrectly and now you've acted like an angry pedantic individual.
Nearly anyone who's bothered to read your garbage has disagreed with you.
Are you even a person -with your obstinance, you're behaving like an LLM.
That is to say, you're confidently incorrect while hallucinating the facts.
Why what?
Tell me your alt without telling me your alt.
I'm my own person, look at my post history.
I'm reading a thread and responding to someone thrashing irrationally due to their own error.
It sure reads like exchanges I've experienced with LLMs of late.
Confident incorrectness has been a characteristic of both of these instances.
I don't have any other federated accounts, by any other name(s).
So - you're still denying the fact that you used the apostrophe incorrectly? The other guy spelled it out for you, and tried to be nice it seems.
I'm about to give you a link about the proper usage, to reflect your prior posting attitude.
You're being a dishonestly rude individual.
No thanks.
No, you're reading a dispute about the intent of my point. He made a grammatical correction that is an editorial error so when he says he's right he's incorrect. Did they bother to inquire further instead of insulting my intelligence as you are right now? No because their wish is to win not to be correct hence the unwillingness to admit their own error that I can't help not notice you haven't mentioned.
It's explicitly against this subs rules to call people chatbots so I'm not even going to bother delving into the stupidity required to assume an llm can carry a reasonable conversation not can't figure out English syntax.
Correct, he's confidently incorrect while I may have made a error in the formation of a sentence which btw I haven't denied he's made an error in demanding he knows the writers intent better then the writer which is both absurd and incredibly egomaniacal.
I don't care about your accounts boss.
I haven't over denied I used it incorrectly, I've denied their assertion that it was an attempt to pluralize Clinton rather then imply possession as a slight to the Clinton family and Trump as well.
Notice I haven't denied proper usage, I've denied his assertion that I'm wrong about my intent.
I'm rude? You started by calling me a chatbot how fucking kind do you think that one is? So I may be rude to the person who's second comment to me was essentially a sarcastic "is it really?" Implying I'm lying or I don't know what my own point is. Why exactly should I be kind to that person when they're at the jump unions to me like you're being now.
Regardless of how you arrived here, your attitude is not vibing with 420 at all, not of late.
A normal human user would understand the context and respond appropriately.
Because I don't let people talk down to me? Yeah I'm not a doormat and you don't know me ya judgy twat.
A normal human user wouldn't start with insults and preconceptions they refused to be swayed from despite all reason and logic.
And again it's specifically and explicitly again sub rules to call people chatbots, read the fucking rules or at the very least take that chucklefuckery away from me.