I really don’t care whether yo… he blocks me, as he doesn’t engage in good faith debate, but pretend to. He pretends to be an American, denies the existence of Russian propaganda, says that Ukraine is committing a genocide bt defending against the Russian invasion, and very often inserts himself into discussions of American politics, as an American.
One of the clearest Russian trolls I’ve ever seen. I don’t care what he thinks of me, personally. I care about fighting disinformation. You don’t…?
That’s your right. But yeah I don’t think tagging somebody who is. Being discussed is harassment. It is not direct. Other person can ignore or block.
People need to keep the record straight tho. They have a right to their shilling, we have a right to document that we disagree and provide our side of the story.
Whole point of censorship is not permit the other side to respond.
If I mention his nickname once a month when the topic of disinformation actors on his specific instance comes up?
No, I’m not. That is not harassment in any way. I don’t stalk his profile, I don’t follow his posts or comments. I just know of him.
Mentioning a username does not harassment constitute.
Okay, let me rephrase then: if anyone ever tagged me four times on one post for no reason other than to argue with me, I would block that person
What do you think forums are for?
I really don’t care whether yo… he blocks me, as he doesn’t engage in good faith debate, but pretend to. He pretends to be an American, denies the existence of Russian propaganda, says that Ukraine is committing a genocide bt defending against the Russian invasion, and very often inserts himself into discussions of American politics, as an American.
One of the clearest Russian trolls I’ve ever seen. I don’t care what he thinks of me, personally. I care about fighting disinformation. You don’t…?
That’s your right. But yeah I don’t think tagging somebody who is. Being discussed is harassment. It is not direct. Other person can ignore or block.
People need to keep the record straight tho. They have a right to their shilling, we have a right to document that we disagree and provide our side of the story.
Whole point of censorship is not permit the other side to respond.
The point isn’t to argue I think, it’s to inform others that he’s not credible (and he’s free to ‘defend’ himself via argument of course).