Brutal wrote: " and unless you guys just really like trolling each other"

- Guilty as charged

--------

Sinij wrote: " So when Derid objected to this article, he implicitly agreed with STOLEN part."

- I dont know how many times I need to restate hoping you will finally get it, my objection was to your insulting manner towards everyone who did not hold to *your* belief that it was 100% legit. Doing so does not require me to believe it was stolen, only that you do not have sufficient evidence to level such strong dismissive language towards those who might disagree.

On a related note, you had been employing this tactic in thread after thread lobbing what I refer to as "Dogmatic BS bombs" - basically the rhetorical equivalent of walking around with a chip on your shoulder. Me being me, I will happily knock it off - cause thats what I do.

------

Brutal wrote: "P.S. Derid, please forgive me (and correct me) if I have misunderstood your position here or if you take offense to me trying to defend said position."

- You are spot on , that is precisely my position. And you are free to post whatever you want here.

----------------

Brutal wrote: "I personally couldn't care less, but if I had to comment on the legitimacy of the election, I would say that in all likelihood there was just as much tampering by one side as the other, so whatever."

- I pretty much agree with this. In the past my complaints about election security have been under the auspices of a GOP win. Generally I evangelize the security issue, because I think it transcends ideological and party lines. I consider election security to be poor, and it will not improve until and unless people of all major ideologies agree that it needs improved. 8 years ago, questioning election security brought the ire of GOPers. The last 4 years questioning election security has brought the ire of Dems. Neither side wants to address election security when "their" guy has recently "won" and I think that is a problem.

A large part of the reason I trolled so hard as opposed to taking a reasoned approach, was the fact that I have been on record here many many times - including in recent weeks, as bringing up election security in a GOP unfriendly light - even recounting actual shenanigans re: voting machines and precinct assignments that were racially tinged, that I saw with my own 2 eyes in addition to reports of and evidence of (but not proof of) possible tampering in the past (namely 2004) in Ohio (where I live). So being labelled as a "right right swamp fever dweller" or whatever, was something I thought merited a deep and thorough trolling. Considering I am copiously on record of being skeptical of election security in general, not just when side "A" or side "B" happens to have most recently won.


------------------

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)