Wait maybe I am expressing myself wrong, I agree with you 100% and all the words i was writing were to confirm your pov :)
Astroturfers will use debating tactics like seeming to be positive about a point while actually wording it so that it comes off as slightly negative, etc., especially so if they’re expecting a lot of pushback.
I wasn’t sure if you were doing that or not, but the ‘attitude’ of my reply was based on your original comment…
A lot of comments are saying that hamas hides behind civilians but from what I see and read hamas and civilians are a melting pot that is interwined due to the extreme oppression in gaza strip. Any palestinian civilian could understand and help or even just not condemn totally hamas due to their conditions and prolly Israel gladly label as hamas any slightly suspect palestinian top
In your original comment you didn’t specify your own opinion of why that was right/wrong, you just stated it as fact, and left us to assume either way.
So my suggestion would be next time to elaborate more with a second paragraph, either agreeing or disagreeing with what you stated in the first paragraph.
In their defense, it was pretty clear to me what they meant from the get-go and your replies seemed unnecessarily hostile.
I truly don’t think I was being unnecessarily hostile, as I did assume they were astroturfing in a stealthy sort of way (as I described). For that matter, the fact that you’re defending them makes me suspect that you too are astroturfing to protect them.
The onus is on the speaker/commentor to speak fully, if they want to be understood fully, so that assumptions are not made, and misunderstanding do not happen. Trust me, I learned about that recently myself here on Lemmy lol.
Then you figure out another way of getting to your enemy. There are rules to War.
You don’t get a ‘get out of jail free card’ excuse to murder civilians.
Bombing them in refugee camps will do the same thing. That is, if they survive the bombing.
Wait maybe I am expressing myself wrong, I agree with you 100% and all the words i was writing were to confirm your pov :)
Astroturfers will use debating tactics like seeming to be positive about a point while actually wording it so that it comes off as slightly negative, etc., especially so if they’re expecting a lot of pushback.
I wasn’t sure if you were doing that or not, but the ‘attitude’ of my reply was based on your original comment…
In your original comment you didn’t specify your own opinion of why that was right/wrong, you just stated it as fact, and left us to assume either way.
So my suggestion would be next time to elaborate more with a second paragraph, either agreeing or disagreeing with what you stated in the first paragraph.
In their defense, it was pretty clear to me what they meant from the get-go and your replies seemed unnecessarily hostile.
I truly don’t think I was being unnecessarily hostile, as I did assume they were astroturfing in a stealthy sort of way (as I described). For that matter, the fact that you’re defending them makes me suspect that you too are astroturfing to protect them.
The onus is on the speaker/commentor to speak fully, if they want to be understood fully, so that assumptions are not made, and misunderstanding do not happen. Trust me, I learned about that recently myself here on Lemmy lol.
I stand by what I said.