DonFerrari said:
You said you are worried about the anti-SJW agenda: check You said you aren't worried about the one making the SJW agenda: check You said you aren't worried about the accuracy of the historian: check You said you are worried about the OP showing only the direct quotes that favored him: check. So what interpretation that you are more aggravated by the anti-SJW than you are by the SJW is wrong? |
1. I didn't say I was worried about the anti-sjw agenda. I said I was bothered by people who misrepresent information to support it. If people were presenting information honestly, I'd have no real objections.
2. And I said why I wasn't concerned about it. Has nothing to do with whether or not I agree with their stande, it's just that I don't visit their website. There are billions of websites. I only tend to worry about the ones I actually use.
3. I don't believe I said that at all. I said I didn't have enough information to comment on that. I'd rather it be accurate, but I'm certainly not about to do any indepth research on the Czech republic in the 1600s.
4. Yup. You got that one right.
So, what I was saying was, I care more about people misrepresenting information to support an anti-sjw agenda on a site I use (btw, I'd be equally bothered if people were doing so to promote a pro-sjw agenda, but I just don't see much of that here), and that I don't care about what people say on a website I never use.
You somehow got from there to I'm worried about any anti-sjw stuff whether honestly presented or not, and that I'm more concerned about this than people trying to get everything censored, which is a topic I never addressed at all.
I trust that if you are making an effort in good faith to understand me you will stand corrected.
