Your post does contain the line "they remained unhappy with the broader policy of respect for trans identities", which to me reads as being at least pretty similar to having "issue with transgender identities." But I'm an outsider to all this and may be missing context.
aberrate_junior_beatnik
joined 2 years ago
Telegram isn't encrypted end-to-end by default; apparently if you do encrypt e2e you can't access chats from multiple devices.
Signal's protocol is widely understood to be the gold standard for security, which is one reason it's been adopted for multiple messengers. Telegram has a bespoke protocol which is not as well regarded.
Trump voters are the victim of a con, but the con is bigger than Trump. Conservatism in general is a con that needs misinformation networks like talk radio, fox news, facebook groups, etc. Without having been steeped in that bullshit for 40+ years, Trump would never have succeeded. It's the whole ecosystem that's doing the radicalization, not just Trump.
Could you elaborate? Because I'm confused by what you could mean here. What is the broader policy that they disagree with? You say they "did agree with the specific neopronouns policy", so it seems like you are saying they agree that "harassment based on gender or neopronouns [should] remain prohibited—even if the user in question was suspected of being a troll"? If the broader policy is a policy of "respect for trans identities", it seems like the only thing about the policy they have a problem with is its respect for trans identities.