this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2026
760 points (98.0% liked)

Greentext

7900 readers
477 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 89 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The fact that nobody watched the damned thing but everyone seems to want to talk about it should say something about the state of American politics.

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 75 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children)

Stop

Giving

Them

Oxygen

If the media would stop giving creeps airtime (outside of ridicule), they’d fade into obscurity. But instead we get to “hear both sides of the story” when one side is just spouting nonsense and lies.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 47 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

when 5 ~~people~~ billionaires own all the media, they can pick and choose what topics people have their attention on

[–] BremboTheFourth@piefed.ca 21 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Which raises the question of why it's on the front page here.

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Because the billionaires are upstream of Lemmy. No one on here is posting their original research and first hand journalism.

[–] hypnicjerk@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

original research and first hand journalism, famous competitors for your focus against... pictures of 4chan posts

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You want to run that past some sort of basic grammar check? I have no idea what you're trying to say.

[–] hypnicjerk@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

no i think i'll label that one under 'you problem'

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Okay. If you don't actually want to be understood, you aren't really trying to communicate. Your just mumbilng to yourself. I don't need to listen. Have a nice time talking to yourself.

[–] johnyreeferseed@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I had no issue understanding what hypnicjerk said. So I'm gonna agree with him that's it's a you problem

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Saying 'it's a you problem' when someone doesn't understand just means 'I am a self-important asshole who wants people to take my half-assed mumblings as important because they come from me, not because of their content.' Being an asshole is definitely a you problem. Have a nice time talking to yourself as well.

You should check the usernames. I was just letting you know that the only person that didn't understand what the other poster meant was YOU. As a 3rd party I completely understood what they meant in their original post. Meaning it is a "you problem". That was also why I mentioned them by name so you could understand that I was a separate person that had zero issues understanding what they meant.

[–] Zoot@reddthat.com 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What others are trying to say is that maybe you should stop being a self important asshole and take the time an courtesy to try and read what they actually wrote.

What they wrote was entirely understandable to me as well. Try using context and critical thinking to parse through it, im sure you'll get it!

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So, when I'm driving, it's fine to drive wherever I want? I can just expect others to accommodate my disregard for established norms and rules of the road? I mean, people have legs and cars of their own so they can expend the effort to predict my movements and drive/walk accordingly, right? And then if any of them complain because they don't want me to dump that extra effort on them, that makes THEM the self-important assholes, right? And if I call them stupid for complaining and asking me to drive within the limits of the broadly accepted rules of the road, especially given the readily available modern tools that could help me do that, I'm not being an asshole, right? I'm totally in the moral right then, aren't I?

If you are speaking, it is reasonable to assume you want to be understood, (otherwise why say anything?) but if you choose to ignore basic rules of communication, and then refuse to clarify when someone asks, you don't want to be understood, or to communicate; you're just making noise. The person I originally responded to was just making noise, as useful in a comments section as someone walking into an in-person conversation and speaking in a language they made up at home. I read what they wrote. Then I read it again. Then I opened the comment thread and post to see if it made more sense in context. I could see a vague form of meaning to which they might be alluding, but not a definite concept, and one of the most basic rules in life is 'the one who dumps work on others simply for the sake of avoiding work for themselves is the asshole.' If you do it out of carelessness, you can try to compensate by taking the work back (explaining what you meant) but they chose to double down. And now, for some reason, you've taken up their defense? Are you failing in critical thinking or/and are you a troll?

[–] Zoot@reddthat.com 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What they wrote is extremely easy to understand, I have no idea what your issue is. I'm sorry that you have a hard time with context.

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

People shouldn't need context to get the basic gist of what you are saying. These sentences you are reading, right now, provide a fully defined meaning with little consideration of context. One could even use these sentences to infer context if the above elements were not available. That's communication. And it is understandable to be casual to a certain degree, but the moment one decides not simply to be unmotivated to explain the meaning of their overly casual utterances, but actively choose to pretend that the failure is entirely that of the receiver, the person is going to effort to be insulting. They could have stayed silent. They are actively choosing harm. Why is that so hard to understand?

[–] bobs_monkey@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 weeks ago

Which is exactly why these morons remain relevant. News media needs this chaos to drive engagement and division.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Okay, but if we post this shit it gets upvotes. And I crave online attention and validation.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

I crave online validation too so I just repost memes, firstpost obvious takes, and post things that make me say "Neat" to the community I created for that express purpose.

[–] Akasazh@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I can't compete with my Grandmother's deep fried Minions memes

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

I'm going to talk about it but only as a reference point for how unpopular and sad the right actually is. If rating were votes, they wouldn't even be top 3rd party.

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Don't forget shitty music! They also spout that sometimes