> There is no need to denigrate a political faction. It's flamebait and off-topic.
And like witnessing a shooting star, I've witnessed manipulation. What this person was upset about was the insinuation that MAGA is conspiratorially minded. That's bad - can't have people agreeing with that! So they first play at striving for fairness (to poor helpless political parties lol). But realizing it's so just beyond the pale at this point to try to treat MAGA as a good faith actor that it wouldn't fly, they pivot to citing tenuously implicated rules.
If this weren't so poorly executed (and if I hadn't caught the edit) I wouldn't have even noticed but given that it is so poorly executed I gotta wonder whether this is just someone slacking at their botfarm job.
Edit: just so no one can accuse me of making this up, here is the screenshot from my reader app which still has the original comment:
I'm proposing an extremely simple thing: there are no circumstances under which one can read the op (a comment about a billboard about a woman, the same woman all the other comments on this page are about) as having anything other than incidental relation to MAGA. So why browbeat/concern-troll about political flamebait or whatever? The answer I arrive at is the obvious one: someone would prefer that the comment were flagged and removed for "breaking the rules".
I tend to believe it’s someone who self identifies as MAGA and didn’t like it being used as a descriptor. The edits were indicative of them not even really knowing how to define what MAGA is to themselves.
Lol just like merely calling a protest an insurrection doesn't make it so, merely calling my describing what you literally did "instigation" doesn't make it so (neither for op).
You quoted my hypothesis for why you edited your original comment. I did not imply anything about MAGA, I implied something about you because it is you who is the subject of my comment, not MAGA.
Reading compression is fundamental (although it's a pity we'll be the last generation to learn that): it's my hypothesis about your state of mind when you changed the comment.
What's funny is that you could easily cut this gordian knot by simply setting the record straight and explaining why you changed the comment from the original exhortation to the current litigious one. But you haven't, across 3 more comments lol.
