Egon [they/them]

:yea:

Thank you very much for your advice!

Thank you!

Thank you! Do you have any online resources you would recommend for learning more? For example how to evaluate the chain - I’ve just bought this bike used, so I don’t know it’s mileage really

@7bicycles@hexbear.net pinging you because I know you know a lot about bicycles, and I hope you can help. I understand if you’re too busy or don’t want to though - no pressure!

Eh, China has been collapsing or about to collapse since the 60’s. I’ll believe it when I see it. Meanwhile the US isn’t doing so hot, which we can actually observe without the need to make the financial troubles of one part of one sector in one region into some sort of sign of an oncoming apocalypse.

Regarding making use of capitalism: Yeah, that’s what dengism is all about. Capitalism has its uses, we’ve just outgrown it.

:pigpoop:

You get what you give

you referenced what happened in 2014, as if that provoked or justified Russia’s current actions.

I’m not the user that referenced it. Once again: I’ve literally only asked you to answer the question. Had I been the one to state the question initially, you still wouldn’t be able to make that conclusion, it is a huge assumption that that would be the line of reasoning, angle of argument or anything else. It could just as easily have been a way to see where we disagree, create a common basis from which to have an argument, to help illustrate a point of larger context or something else entirely. It is common for a discussion to create a basis of shared understanding from which we can then diverge or argue.

Im open to actually discussing it with you if you’ll actually explain what you mean and why you feel that way.

No thanks. Its pretty clear you’re not capable of pleasant or good faith discussion, instead choosing weird debate tactics, condescention and strawmanning me. I’ve literally only asked you to answer a question, and you haven’t been able to fulfill this simple request. It’s pretty clear any extended conversation would just be even worse.
Maybe when you’re less of an antagonistic debatelord.

Youd probably get a lot further if you engaged in good faith, instead of being snide

Disengage

Disengage

Disengage

It’s not an insult when it’s true

You’ve given exactly one more, which I engaged with. Stop being obtuse.
I’ve given you the criteria. You kept asking for the criteria, yet you had received it.

This is going in circles.

If you truly are not simply saying “I just don’t trust it” as you say one shouldn’t do, what leads you to denounce every last source of mine, case by case?

I’m not saying that, I’ve taken the time to go thru them and illustrate why they are bad sources for backing up your claim. I have not simply denounced them based on vibes, as you seem to suggest, despite me taking pains to illustrate the process and reasoning.

I should point out many of your sources weren’t exactly news websites, a few seemed like homemade PSA sites.

This was almost something that approached engaging with a source. Now all you need to do is engage with the content and critique it based on a factual basis.
I’ve already gone thru why “well this is a famous brand” is not a good foundation for “what makes a source good for a given claim”, but if you need it in reddit-language: Appeal to authority.

This is obviously going in circles, so I am going to disengage from this discussion. I hope you will one day look back and realise how obtuse you’ve been.

Alright, this is going in circles, it’s obvious you’re not acting in good faith, so I am going to disengage

Allright you’re just going in circles, it’s obvious you refuse to engage with anything I put in front of you, and you keep behaving as if I haven’t gone into every single one of your arguments. You’re wasting both of our times by willfully choosing to be obtuse, so I am going to disengage from this conversation

Jesus Christ you really are just going in a roundabout. You claim history from middle ages is relevant, but moderns history is spurious, okay good whatever. By that logic the us if a fascist slave state, as is every single European country.

Sure it’s a strawman fallacy to quote things you said back to you, that’s what a strawman is allright. Wanting to engage with your sources is whataboutism or whatever. You still haven’t engaged in any source critique. You speak of studying history and linguistics, but you fail the very base-level tools of both of those studies.
Yeah good some website says they’re isolationist, because they say they are.

This is due to the nation’s strict closed-country policy: not many outsiders have visited there and not many North Koreans have traveled to the outside world.

Conditions that, say it with me, are imposed by the us. Here’s your favorite source Wikipedia here’s the state dep websitehttps://www.state.gov/democratic-peoples-republic-of-korea-sanctions/. It is in fact incredibly simple to both visit the dprk, as long as you’re not American https://www.youngpioneertours.com/north-korea-tours/
this has already been argued with you, which you refused to engage with, which is how we ended up in this semantic rabbit hole. You keep arguing they’re isolationist because of culture or medieval history, completely ignoring modern history and current affairs. But this has already been pointed out to you.