Every time you quote someone you tag them.Uh do know what tagging means?
You should have asked if you were unsure.
@jayshiggs
Quoting:
Code:
[QUOTE="jayshiggs, post: 29548982, member: 3567"
What the fukk is up with the OP ED section of the New York Times?
- Thread starter Dr. Acula
- Start date
@jayshiggs
Quoting:
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
No that's called just 'quoting' not 'quoting and tagging'.
Tagging is writing @(insert screen name). That I will never do to you. You're welcome. lol
Are you referring to mentioning?No that's called just 'quoting' not 'quoting and tagging'.
Tagging is writing @(insert screen name). That I will never do to you. You're welcome. lol
When I quoted you and mentioned you did you receive two alerts on the same post?
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
Yeah, I'll never mention you. lolAre you referring to mentioning?
When I quoted you and mentioned you did you receive two alerts on the same post?
But you will quote me ad infinitum :youmadcam:
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
Call Me James negged you for your post in the thread What the fukk is up with the OP ED section of the New York Times?. With the following comment: enjoy these negs idiot
I'll never neg you either. lol This guy is furious!
I'll never neg you either. lol This guy is furious!
Russian Bot v.2.1
Banned
you're a triggered liberal snowflake! wowas a black male, I hope you have thicker skin than this in real life
I never got Op-Eds personally? To me, the purpose of the news is to listen to the facts and then come to your own conclusion.... kinda like being in the jury of a trial. Whenever you are getting someone's opinions of the facts, you are opening yourself up to their biases.
Personally, I can't even read sites like TheRoot because they don't report facts, they report their beliefs and personal opinions about the facts in every article. NYT outside of the OpEd strives to be as neutral as possible and I fukk with that.
Personally, I can't even read sites like TheRoot because they don't report facts, they report their beliefs and personal opinions about the facts in every article. NYT outside of the OpEd strives to be as neutral as possible and I fukk with that.
Its been like that for a while, the shift is with conservatism.
For a racist conservative (like Charles Murray or William F. Buckley) to be able to pass their bullshyt off as a legitimate ideological stance in a mainstream media source, they had to play the middle. American conservatism has shifted much further left, into general neo-Nazi/anarcho-capitalist territory mixed with a White-victim complex and a Redemptionist mindset.
Plus the cacs complain about any paper that doesn't uphold racism as being biased.
Its not WSJ op-ed bad yet, but it can and likely will be.
For a racist conservative (like Charles Murray or William F. Buckley) to be able to pass their bullshyt off as a legitimate ideological stance in a mainstream media source, they had to play the middle. American conservatism has shifted much further left, into general neo-Nazi/anarcho-capitalist territory mixed with a White-victim complex and a Redemptionist mindset.
Plus the cacs complain about any paper that doesn't uphold racism as being biased.
Its not WSJ op-ed bad yet, but it can and likely will be.