Violence erupted at the University of California, Los Angeles after pro-Israeli counter-demonstrators attacked a pro-Palestinian campus encampment. Bubbling tensions on the campus boiled over following the alleged breach of a “buffer zone” between the rival groups.

  • gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I wasn’t making an argument, simply explaining what this headline meant.

    You’re welcome to publish your own news articles if you think you can do better, but it doesn’t seem you could be objective.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yes, we had established that the headline’s use of words was wrong, and then you came to chime in afterwards to argue in their favor. Nobody was confused about their intent before you came here. You added nothing but to contradict the previous user.

      • gregorum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yes, we had established that the headline’s use of words was wrong

        No, several people here feel that way. You and others have that opinion. Nobody gets do decide their own facts, however. But this is a news article, not an opinion piece, and objective reporting of facts is what was called for. You are free to disagree about that, but it doesn’t make you “right”.

        and then you came to chime in afterwards to argue in their favor

        Wrong. I didn’t argue in anyone’s “favor”. I merely pointed out what I said above: this is a news article, not an opinion piece, which reported on a group of protesters being attacked by a group of counter-protesters. How you or anyone may feel about that or those involved is opinion and doesn’t belong in a news article.

        Nobody was confused about their intent before you came here. You added nothing but to contradict the previous user.

        Well, that’s just demonstrably false, and if you don’t like that, or the contents of the article, that’s what the downvote button is for, but I didn’t write the article and am not to blame for it’s contents.

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m seeing this comment pattern a lot lately where they take apart and quote the previous comment in an argument, often using nonsequitur bullshit responses. Is this the latest bot, or do the kids these days lack all originality? I don’t do that shit. I assume you already know what your previous comment was without quoting it back to you. Maybe I’m giving you too much credit?

          • gregorum@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I’m seeing this response a lot lately. Can’t write a rational counter argument, so out come the insults and/or accusations of being a bot.

            Classy.

            FWIW, I don’t hold it against you. This is a terrible, horrible subject and series of events, and I’m trying very hard not to be overly emotional about all of this. I very much do support the pro-Palestinian protesters, but it also think it’s important to keep facts straight and to keep a cool head when discussing these events.

            I’m not your enemy.