@furgar @wjmaggos @Pantangelini

Furgar shares an image from a random social media account saying it’s going to flood where you live tomorrow. CNN says it isn’t. which claim would you initially think is more likely to be true?

It would 100% depend on recency. If #CNN says it isn’t going to flood but they said that a month ago, and furgar’s post was two days ago, I’d be more prone to believe furgar’s post. But, if furgar’s post was last week, and yesterday #CNN posted an article saying that #NOAA actually says it’s not going to flood, then I’d believe #CNN.

would you look further into it before sharing either of these claims?

For something like this where I don’t know much about the underlying info, I’d probably be more likely to make a post saying “I’m hearing that it’s going to flood” rather than boosting the post.

would it matter what you wanted to be true?

Objection your honor, leading 🧑🏾‍💼

TECI Social

@Pantangelini @wjmaggos

if cnn says not true, and fugar says true, I lean fugar because that’s where facts point.

But to be fair I think he’s talking about in the absence of all other facts and context

@realcaseyrollins @Pantangelini

yes, I'm saying all other things being equal. somehow you knew to clarify that for panta but brought in recency to avoid answering the question yourself.

can you understand how these conversations often feel like trolling to me?

@wjmaggos @Pantangelini

can you understand how these conversations often feel like trolling to me?

Nope, unless you think that arguments that you can’t rebutt are just exercises in trolling

@Pantangelini @wjmaggos

I say make candy legal, just don’t buy it. He says make candy illegal cause he hasn’t the will not to buy it and that’s someone else’s fault.

Slight straw man, but now I’m wondering if he supports #MichaelBloomberg’s #BigGulp ban lol

Because there’s actually a parallel with public health and safety there

TECI Social

@realcaseyrollins @Pantangelini

I do not support making candy illegal. sometimes laws are the right approach, sometimes they are not. it's always about balancing the most likely overall outcomes from all possible approaches.

https://liberal.city/@wjmaggos/111298969210938107

william maggos (@[email protected])

@[email protected] laws don't eliminate problems, they change the math. I admit they sometimes make things worse, like with drugs. you guys never say we should change the laws cause they haven't stopped pedos. laws and their proper enforcement do usually help us lessen the amount of something. stronger laws would lessen the amount of accessible guns and thus killing with guns, and they are a more effective weapon than knives etc.

Liberal City
@Pantangelini @wjmaggos Well, that’s a bit leading 😂

@realcaseyrollins @wjmaggos

Purposefully, I'll admit.

I'd enjoy maggos to be more like ian crossland and not such bad faith, no backing down, he'll threads

@Pantangelini @wjmaggos While true I think it’s best to not presume why someone believes something.

I don’t know why he supports gun control and not the #BigGulp ban, it’d be best for me to let him explain why rather than make an assumption.

TECI Social