1 Bread is not enough to call evidence, but it's interesting to see what gets responses - and what does not…
Memes, anons, MEMES!
intentionally vague.
I'm sort of testing just how 'botted' we are now and early data suggest that there's a LOT of bots now.
Sadly, that you chose to respond to the text-only post is disheartening.
the 'post text versions of articles' bullshit is absolutely a new thing.
Total bullshit - if you post a link to the article then the 'archiving services' can crawl the URL if they want it that badly.
false yourself
That's why we post archive links, not direct links.
because someone posted a script to grab stuff, tough shit - all it does is fill DB's unnecessarily. If the writer of the script stated that, well, tough shit again.
Just makes it easy for script-bots to grab keywords to slide/shill.
are you fucking kidding me?
Calling me a shill because we disagree on some parts, but agree on others apparently?
There's a shill involved here, yes, but the evidence at hand strongly leans toward projection here.
This 'post the text of the article linked on the bread' claim is what is being discussed, not screenshot vs link vs archive link…
Never heard of 'post the text of the article here' becauase that's not evidence of jack shit. That's precisely 'why' we use screenshots and archive links…
But whatevs.
I'd say the stupid responses you drew should answer the question anon. lol
They're proving my point quite nicely.
ha! I like it.
strange timing of that narrative shift.
Public opinion against Immigration now?
HRC may be running again?
Time to change the message, fellow wind socks!