flicker

You and I have had very different experiences with LSD.

I know why I'm here. It's because I have gastroenteritis and nothing else to do.

The evidence that doesn't conclude her innocence, was her claiming things like being a member of the LGBTQ community. That doesn't prove innocence, especially in face of the evidence that Protist was saying they didn't have enough of, and one assumes that's either because they don't want to believe it, or because they chose not to actually read anything they were commenting on. Which, coincidentally, is information you didn't have because you also must not have read any of the supporting evidence at that point.

I wasn't referring to any of that. I was referring to you jumping on an entirely third party, Samvega, and attacking them of baseless accusations. Which is where I joined the conversation. So that might tell you where I came from, since you're so interested in context.

Samvega was not making a baseless accusation. In fact, you've reviewed the evidence and even admitted at this point that the lady is in fact probably racist.

Your only defense for all of this is, "I just don't want people to accuse random people of being racist." But you also recognize that hasn't happened here. So why are you arguing with me?

Thank you.

I'm not giving deeper meaning glances to a random pic in my feed. I have a few minutes here and there to scroll and I'm not devoting this-might-be-thought-provoking levels of time to random nonsense.

Hell the second highest rated top-level comment on this post is someone asking for help seeing the story.

People who are so high on their own farts that they get irritated that other, less intelligent or less attention capable people are getting a hint and that they should have to (gasp!) see that is ridiculous. That's where the real pretention is.

I just realized that there was a Phantom Space Man. It was Red Death!

He just didn't stay on the space station...

So now you're saying the reason you're indignant that someone might have said she was racist... was because they didn't begin by saying, "I, too, have seen the evidence that is referenced in the article we're all commenting on?"

Wylde Flowers.

I romanced and married someone then there was a massive betrayal that took place. I was so upset and angry that I'd married this person two seasons ago and then they betrayed me!

Got a divorce and then couldn't finish the game. It didn't help I was so happy with my choice that I'd closed the door on every other romantic option. Lonely farm for me!

Teddy Roosevelt was a big conservationist. He would've happily knocked some heads over the idea he was effeminate for it.

My father (who died in like 2008 so he never knew these Trump years) used to call people who made him mad "commie pinko bed-wetters." It's a whole thing for some people; chain your weird insult words together.

In the context of the original comment you made in this thread, we knew she had made the post. You even reference her talking about the post she made. That post is, in fact, racist. So the facts you're trying to point to are-

1. She made a post
2. It was racist

There's nothing baseless about either of those statements, so there's nothing baseless about stating she is, in fact, probably a racist. And your arguments about giving someone (who admitted they made the racist post) the "benefit of the doubt" are arguments for giving a person, who made a racist statement, the benefit of the doubt, about being racist.

Accusing others of making a baseless accusation against an innocent hold zero water when these facts are evident. I am pointing at the basis.

How is "the lady who made an extremely racist post online might be racist" a random accusation, exactly?

I popped into conservative spaces during the debate and there were a surprising number of people claiming the opposite.

I don't understand how we got here