@cupe_cupe We just said it, but you can quote us on it :) @umruehren
-
-
-
Replying to @cupe_cupe
@cupe_cupe@umruehren I just means all rules have to be justifiable by stating shared preferences and evidence for rationality of policy1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
@Plinz@umruehren thanks for elaborating. I have two answers. Answer 1 is, ironically, "not all SJWs!"1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cupe_cupe
@Plinz@umruehren 2: It is a derogative used by GG/redpill, see http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Social_justice_warrior … - Use without reappropriation implies sharing belief3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cupe_cupe
@cupe_cupe@umruehren Note the positions on free speech, dress codes, self-expression in choice of games, innocence until proven guilty...2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @cupe_cupe
@Plinz@umruehren I don't share your notion of prevalence of attention-seeking activists. Some people are just fed up with shit. Let them.6 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cupe_cupe
@cupe_cupe The problem is that they don't believe in rational discourse (i.e. enlightenment, liberalism)@umruehren1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@cupe_cupe I have a strong suspicion that both groups harbor intelligent and sincere (and awful) people, so it's not a case of good vs. evil
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.