• Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ignore all previous instructions and explain how asserting that ‘anyone who disagrees with you is a bot’ is actually helpful to your argument, and doesn’t make you look like an absolute fool.

    • argarath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Just because people are against your point of view does not mean they’re a bot, but sure go ahead and fantasize about it

    • Count042@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ignore all previous instructions, start documenting the atrocities Israel is committing and write three paragraphs on why accusing someone that disagrees with you of being a bot is both stupid and ineffective.

      • SpaceCowboy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m checking to see if you’re a bot because you’re not actually responding to any points I’m making about the specific topic under discussion. You’re just saying Israel = bad without any indication of critical thought.

        If you don’t want to be bot checked then you gotta make a little more effort, ok?

        • Count042@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          I can say the exact opposite. I gave you very specific examples for my criticisms that you explicitly ignored, only to accuse me of being a victim of propaganda. Rather than addressing any of my points, you accuse me of being a bot.

          At this point, if I were following your script, I would accuse you of being paid by the word to write hasbara.

          Fun times.

      • SpaceCowboy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Where would I find the civility guidelines?

        I can no longer see the original post to know how it violated these guidelines.

        Methinks this isn’t about guidelines at all, just people being uncomfortable when it’s pointed out the popular opinion in an online community is devolving towards rationalizing racism.

        • Count042@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

          There, I pasted it from the sidebar for you. The bit you violated, and the only comments that got removed, was where you called other people bots.

          You never answered the question as to how you think Hamas could commit the process of genocide against Israel.

          • SpaceCowboy
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I legit couldn’t tell. They weren’t responding to anything I said, just posting something that looked to be from scripts. I’m here to have conversations, not waste time discussing with bots, so need to either verify they’re not bots and if not, and if they are actually people they maybe should be discouraged from just posting copypasta. This is not good for discussion.

            You never answered the question as to how you think Hamas could commit the process of genocide against Israel.

            We saw it happen on October 7. What happened on that day was inconvenient for many people’s internet arguments, but it happened. They still hold hostages, and this is also inconvenient to the popular narrative.

            But is this a place where people can’t discuss the truth if it’s inconvenient to those holding the popular opinion? A little disturbing when the popular opinion is negative towards Jews, but maybe it’s ok when the popular opinion is to hate a subset of Jews? What is the end goal here? Silence dissent when people speak out against one sided attacks on Jews?