this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
-44 points (21.8% liked)

Conservative

439 readers
100 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

  1. Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.

  2. We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.

  3. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Rip Canada

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

You have provided nothing but a misunderstanding on the topic. You have provided zero documents to back your claim.

I provided you with a quote from the first two sentences of the same document that you supplied. Do you need me to post the exact same link in order for it to count in your mind?

I provided you that quote and then narrowed it down stating exactly which parts applied. You have never once addressed that. You tried to introduce a requirement of other external documents. I don't need to provide other documents or usage cases because the link you provided sets the criteria. I asked you a question about that link. You have been avoiding that link ever since.

I don't think you are even tracking what you are saying.

What is my claim?

My problem is dishonest people. I can keep saying that.