That wasn’t for the Nazi, it was for other people reading what the Nazi wrote. I don’t want people to get taken in by the poorly structured arguments and the constant moving of goalposts.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally
Nope, I clearly must have missed whatever you call evidence is.
But do feel free to provide your citations, that ought to be amusing and sad to say the least.
Why do you use wikipedia as a source given the statement from staff who run wikipedia?
Obviously you’ve never heard of the concept of ‘citing credible sources’.
It’s because of the concept of credible sources that I ask why you use wikipedia given the statement from staff that run wikipedia
That’s an ad hominem and not a valid argument. I know the internet breeds bad habits in people, but you really should try to do better.
‘What the staff says’ has nothing to do with citing and linking to primary sources, which is what is important and the focus of this discussion.
Just donvote, tag for future downvotes and move on. A defender of Neo-Nazis isn’t ever going to defend their stance with facts and reality.
That wasn’t for the Nazi, it was for other people reading what the Nazi wrote. I don’t want people to get taken in by the poorly structured arguments and the constant moving of goalposts.