RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $720Goal: $3500

User talk:Ariel31459

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Archives for this talk page: <1>, (new)

Unacceptable username[edit]

Firstly it wasn't an unacceptable username, secondly that's not a valid reason for an infinite block. AceModerator 01:32, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

@Ace McWicked OK boss. I assumed it was was used as a form of address, in which case I think it is unacceptable. But, that's just a guess. I yield to your better judgement.Ariel31459 (talk) 01:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Normal behavior[edit]

So this just happened based on a very benign reference including a cited article and he kept trying to remove it from the conversation. Is this normal behavior? This seems indicative of some major issues here (Censorship topic below was left on my page via that user) Einlanzer (talk) 01:39, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Einlanzer I'm noticing that you have a weird aversion to actually talking to me. Talking about me, sure, but definitely an aversion to conversation. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 01:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
GrammarCommie is an energetic critic of newcomers who look like trolls, or so he thinks. He will get used to you if you persevere ( I hope). — Unsigned, by: Ariel31459 / talk / contribs
I also have a low tolerance for political illiteracy. Which this person expounds. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 03:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Elizabeth Warren[edit]

Why are you so adamant on stating that her claims of Native heritage weren’t false? We discussed it here, and came to the conclusion that the best way to categorize that particular claim was “false”.TheLeftIsIrrational (talk) 03:35, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Allow me to explain: The claim may be false , but the expression "to falsely claim," means about the same as "to claim falsely," which has the implication of being intentionally misleading. Since you are new here you need to be aware of the fact that we tend to give progressives the benefit of the doubt. Ariel31459 (talk) 18:06, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Excuse me, she fucking lied. It was a false claim that she had native heritage. It was a harmful lie at that. It’s cute that you think you should give a white woman the benefit of the doubt for stealing indigenous identity for her own benefit, but that’s a terrible stance and not one any rational person should make. It isn’t something that should be justified or given the benefit of the doubt. Further, your semantics are beyond stupid. I stated, verbatim, that she claimed falsely (in that order, though it would mean no difference if I put “falsely” first). I did not say “she meant to lie to her constituents”. A false claim is a false claim regardless of intent. And in this case, it’s harmful regardless of intent. TheLeftIsIrrational (talk) 01:01, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
The case is clearly stated that Warren took advantage of her situation. Get over yourself.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:52, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, which is established in the simple fact that she had falsely claimed to be Native. I don’t get what’s not clicking for you. TheLeftIsIrrational (talk) 01:26, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Something else will be "clicking" soon... 79.67.78.210 (talk) 13:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Don’t be shy, tell us what you mean. TheLeftIsIrrational (talk) 18:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Behind a bunch of numbers. I wouldn't expect this one to elaborate but who knows. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 16:37, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
nudge nudge wink wink say no more say no more, a nudge is as good as a wink to a blind man — Unsigned, by: 92.0.195.203 / talk / contribs

Timbah[edit]

What are your thoughts on his recent three part essay on O'Keefe and Project Veritas? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 23:53, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

@GrammarCommie: I watched the first and most of the second. Looks bad on O'Keefe, though the titles might make them seem to be eulogies (Ten Years of Truth). Before I go back for the rest, is there anything in particular you want an opinion on?Ariel31459 (talk) 04:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
I just wanted your general impression. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 12:27, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
@GrammarCommie: OK. The series is open ended, with at least one more part to come. Our wiki article on O'Keefe is very incomplete compared with these three videos, which total about four hours. The stuff in the third video is about George Soros ( a big O'Keefe fuckup ) and also, the 2016 Presidential Campaign. Watch the third video if you haven't gone through it. There is a lot in there not mentioned in our article (which can be improved). If you are feeling creative you could use the series as a guide to rewriting the article, or just adding the more recent stuff. My impression is the series tells you everything you would ever want to know about O'Keefe's dishonesty, and his continuing pernicious influence in American media.Ariel31459 (talk) 01:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

grammarcommie[edit]

Hi, this is just to say that while you tried to contact commie about a discussion you had on a talk page he is currently under LANCB status and he told me to tell you.Vorarchivist (talk) 19:19, 30 August 2020 (UTC)