Fuck Forbes. They prop up conservatives and conservative talking points. They also post screens of tweets from conservatives, like the dickbag (from this article) who referred to the Ukraine army as "Ukronazis".
The news of this attack is great to hear, but we should not be supporting Forbes with clicks. They are the enemy.
I tend to agree with you, but I also think it's important to know how the "enemy" thinks and interpret the news. I don't think we should lock ourselves up in echo bubbles only reading stuff we agree with.
In theory I'd agree with you. I don't mind reading of nuances or different opinions than mine.
In general however, conservative media are worthless piece of shit embarrassments that I don't want to waste time on.
There's a difference between discussing with sometime with a different opinion, and stopping in the middle of the road responding to every deranged, mentally challenged ignorant mean crack addict who yells their vision of the world from the top of a soap box.
Agreed. They don't argue in good faith. Their goal is not honesty and truth. What's the point in engaging with someone like that?
Arguing in good faith is the important part.
As soon as I engage with someone not arguing in good faith, I leave. There's just no point.
Comparing Forbes to a deranged, mentally challenged crack addict isn't very fair, whatever your opinion is on Forbes or crack addicts.
Yeah, at least crack addicts have an excuse
We don't need to post their blatant propaganda as if it were a reliable source in order to do that though.
Forbes is just a blogging platform where "contributors" can post their clickbait. Forbes adds their reputation and the ads and then splits the profit with the "contributor"...
That explains the extremely low quality content from them. Thank you.
I once had a college professor tell me forbes was 'absolutely reliable.'
That was a decade years ago, but still.
Forbes used to be credible. Like so many, they gave up on making good content, because, it costs money to do so.
It not just cost money. It's easier to generate outrage and "interesting" articles when you can just make shit up (or at least distort facts), so bullshit gets more clicks and thus is more profitable!
In this case you are wrong. This article is by Forbes Staff, not a contributor.
Forbes uses one name to deliver two different products, one of which is an in house magazine.
we should not be supporting Forbes with clicks.
DeVito gif May I offer you an archive link in these trying times?
Nevertheless, Slava Ukraini!
What does that translate to ? some sort of rallying cry
Except for the tweet, how is this article not just bringing the news? I don’t get it.
Believe it or not, Forbes has written more than a single article.
But why give that comment on a post that is not that?
Because, just like FOX News we don't want to support any of their shit.
Just because there is one berry in the mountain of feces, we don't need to go digging for it.
Plenty of better news sources to support anyway.
Conservatives like the Tories, who are like"fascist-lite", or conservatives like USA conservatives, who are full on "nazi level fascists"? 😅
I think Forbes is scummy for many reasons and never liked them, you've given me another reason to dislike them.
I agree with the referencing a horrible twitter user in the article being a bad thing, but your stance on conservatives, especially your username, is very fascist in of itself.
No. It's not fascist to have a firm and authoritative opinion. It is, perhaps, violent and authoritarian in outlook, but conservatives have just tolerated if not endorsed an insurrection under false pretenses and those conservatives have yet to kill the traitor responsible for it, so contemplation of violence is justified because this 'cold civil war' as Vivek called it is not going to end with that boomer criminal in power ever again.
Are you suggesting there isn't nazis in Ukraine's armed forces? Take a look at the cemeteries for the soldiers, you will notice some weird flags flying.
Fuck Forbes. They prop up conservatives and conservative talking points. They also post screens of tweets from conservatives, like the dickbag (from this article) who referred to the Ukraine army as "Ukronazis".
The news of this attack is great to hear, but we should not be supporting Forbes with clicks. They are the enemy.
I tend to agree with you, but I also think it's important to know how the "enemy" thinks and interpret the news. I don't think we should lock ourselves up in echo bubbles only reading stuff we agree with.
In theory I'd agree with you. I don't mind reading of nuances or different opinions than mine.
In general however, conservative media are worthless piece of shit embarrassments that I don't want to waste time on.
There's a difference between discussing with sometime with a different opinion, and stopping in the middle of the road responding to every deranged, mentally challenged ignorant mean crack addict who yells their vision of the world from the top of a soap box.
Agreed. They don't argue in good faith. Their goal is not honesty and truth. What's the point in engaging with someone like that?
Arguing in good faith is the important part.
As soon as I engage with someone not arguing in good faith, I leave. There's just no point.
Comparing Forbes to a deranged, mentally challenged crack addict isn't very fair, whatever your opinion is on Forbes or crack addicts.
Yeah, at least crack addicts have an excuse
We don't need to post their blatant propaganda as if it were a reliable source in order to do that though.
Forbes is just a blogging platform where "contributors" can post their clickbait. Forbes adds their reputation and the ads and then splits the profit with the "contributor"...
That explains the extremely low quality content from them. Thank you.
I once had a college professor tell me forbes was 'absolutely reliable.'
That was a decade years ago, but still.
Forbes used to be credible. Like so many, they gave up on making good content, because, it costs money to do so.
It not just cost money. It's easier to generate outrage and "interesting" articles when you can just make shit up (or at least distort facts), so bullshit gets more clicks and thus is more profitable!
In this case you are wrong. This article is by Forbes Staff, not a contributor.
Forbes uses one name to deliver two different products, one of which is an in house magazine.
DeVito gif May I offer you an archive link in these trying times?
Nevertheless, Slava Ukraini!
What does that translate to ? some sort of rallying cry
Glory to Ukraine
Except for the tweet, how is this article not just bringing the news? I don’t get it.
Believe it or not, Forbes has written more than a single article.
But why give that comment on a post that is not that?
Because, just like FOX News we don't want to support any of their shit.
Just because there is one berry in the mountain of feces, we don't need to go digging for it.
Plenty of better news sources to support anyway.
Conservatives like the Tories, who are like"fascist-lite", or conservatives like USA conservatives, who are full on "nazi level fascists"? 😅
I think Forbes is scummy for many reasons and never liked them, you've given me another reason to dislike them.
I agree with the referencing a horrible twitter user in the article being a bad thing, but your stance on conservatives, especially your username, is very fascist in of itself.
Intolerance of intolerance is essential to a free society. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
No. It's not fascist to have a firm and authoritative opinion. It is, perhaps, violent and authoritarian in outlook, but conservatives have just tolerated if not endorsed an insurrection under false pretenses and those conservatives have yet to kill the traitor responsible for it, so contemplation of violence is justified because this 'cold civil war' as Vivek called it is not going to end with that boomer criminal in power ever again.
Are you suggesting there isn't nazis in Ukraine's armed forces? Take a look at the cemeteries for the soldiers, you will notice some weird flags flying.